Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 17 (0.44 seconds)
Sanjay Singh & Anr. Ã Petitioners vs U.P. Public Service ... on 9 January, 2007 cites

State Of Bihar & Anr vs Bal Mukund Sah & Ors on 14 March, 2000

15. The petitioners point out that the PSC Procedure Rules were not made in consultation with the High Court. On the other hand, the Judicial Service Rules, 2001 which came into effect from 1.7.2000, were made in consultation with both Commission and the High Court. It is, therefore, submitted that the Judicial Service Rules alone will regulate and govern the recruitment of Civil Judges (Junior Division) including examinations and interviews and the proviso to Rule 51 of PSC Procedure Rules will not apply to recruitment of Civil Judges. Reliance is placed on the decisions of this Court in State of Bihar v. Bal Mukund Sah [2000 (4) SCC 640], Union of India v. Hansoli Devi [2002 (7) SCC 273] and Union of India v. Deoki Nandan Aggarwal [1992 Supp. 1 SCC 323] in regard to interpretation of the Rules.
Supreme Court of India Cites 108 - Cited by 53 - S B Majmudar - Full Document

Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr. vs Hansoli Devi And Ors. on 12 September, 2002

15. The petitioners point out that the PSC Procedure Rules were not made in consultation with the High Court. On the other hand, the Judicial Service Rules, 2001 which came into effect from 1.7.2000, were made in consultation with both Commission and the High Court. It is, therefore, submitted that the Judicial Service Rules alone will regulate and govern the recruitment of Civil Judges (Junior Division) including examinations and interviews and the proviso to Rule 51 of PSC Procedure Rules will not apply to recruitment of Civil Judges. Reliance is placed on the decisions of this Court in State of Bihar v. Bal Mukund Sah [2000 (4) SCC 640], Union of India v. Hansoli Devi [2002 (7) SCC 273] and Union of India v. Deoki Nandan Aggarwal [1992 Supp. 1 SCC 323] in regard to interpretation of the Rules.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 262 - Full Document

Union Of India And Anr vs Deoki Nandan Aggarwal on 4 September, 1991

15. The petitioners point out that the PSC Procedure Rules were not made in consultation with the High Court. On the other hand, the Judicial Service Rules, 2001 which came into effect from 1.7.2000, were made in consultation with both Commission and the High Court. It is, therefore, submitted that the Judicial Service Rules alone will regulate and govern the recruitment of Civil Judges (Junior Division) including examinations and interviews and the proviso to Rule 51 of PSC Procedure Rules will not apply to recruitment of Civil Judges. Reliance is placed on the decisions of this Court in State of Bihar v. Bal Mukund Sah [2000 (4) SCC 640], Union of India v. Hansoli Devi [2002 (7) SCC 273] and Union of India v. Deoki Nandan Aggarwal [1992 Supp. 1 SCC 323] in regard to interpretation of the Rules.
Supreme Court of India Cites 18 - Cited by 430 - Full Document

State Of U.P. And Ors vs Renusagar Power Co. And Others on 28 July, 1988

39. Learned counsel for the Commission also referred to several decisions in support of its contention that courts will be slow to interfere with matters affecting policy requiring technical expertise and leave them for decision of experts. (State of U.P. v. Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. - 1988 (4) SCC 59, Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. Union of India  1996 (9) SCC 709, Federation of Railway Officers Association v. Union of India  2003 (4) SCC 289). There can be no doubt about the said principle. But manifest arbitrariness and irrationality is an exception to the said principle. Therefore, the said decisions are of no avail.
Supreme Court of India Cites 56 - Cited by 351 - S Mukharji - Full Document

Tata Iron And Steel Co. Ltd. Etc vs Union Of India And Anr on 23 July, 1996

39. Learned counsel for the Commission also referred to several decisions in support of its contention that courts will be slow to interfere with matters affecting policy requiring technical expertise and leave them for decision of experts. (State of U.P. v. Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. - 1988 (4) SCC 59, Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. Union of India  1996 (9) SCC 709, Federation of Railway Officers Association v. Union of India  2003 (4) SCC 289). There can be no doubt about the said principle. But manifest arbitrariness and irrationality is an exception to the said principle. Therefore, the said decisions are of no avail.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 118 - Full Document

Federation Of Railway Officers ... vs Union Of India on 13 March, 2003

39. Learned counsel for the Commission also referred to several decisions in support of its contention that courts will be slow to interfere with matters affecting policy requiring technical expertise and leave them for decision of experts. (State of U.P. v. Renusagar Power Co. Ltd. - 1988 (4) SCC 59, Tata Iron & Steel Co. Ltd. v. Union of India  1996 (9) SCC 709, Federation of Railway Officers Association v. Union of India  2003 (4) SCC 289). There can be no doubt about the said principle. But manifest arbitrariness and irrationality is an exception to the said principle. Therefore, the said decisions are of no avail.
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 242 - Full Document
1   2 Next