Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.24 seconds)
Sushant Suresh Salvi vs The State Of Maharashtra And Ors on 28 September, 2017 cites

Ashok Kumar Singh & Anr vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 12 August, 2014

25. On behalf of Respondent No.13 in Writ Petition No.6631 of 2017 and Respondent Nos.13, 21, 24, 26 and 27 in Writ Petition No.9242 of 2017, who were the original Applicants before the Tribunal, learned counsel Shri S.A. Sawant, has supported the impugned Judgment and Order of the Tribunal. It is submitted that the Writ Petition Nos.6631 of 2017 and 9242 of 2017 are not maintainable, as the Petitioners therein were not party to the Original Applications filed before the Tribunal and, therefore, the Petitioners have no locus to file the Petitions. According to learned counsel Shri Sawant, as the 26/48 WP-6631-9242-10150-17.doc ::: Uploaded on - 28/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2017 01:51:55 ::: Petitioners have participated in the entire 'Selection Process', now they cannot challenge the 'Selection Process', merely because they have not become successful therein. To substantiate this submission, he has placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in case of Ashok Kumar and Anr. Vs. State of Bihar and Ors., in Civil Appeal No.9042 of 2012, dated 21st October, 2016, wherein it was held that, "When the candidates have appeared and participated in the selection process, then they cannot subsequently turn round and contend that the selection process was unfair and/or there was lacuna therein, merely because the result is not palatable."
Patna High Court - Orders Cites 6 - Cited by 17 - J Saran - Full Document

The State Of Maharashtra And Ors. vs S.P. Kalamkar [Alongwith Writ Petition ... on 31 January, 2008

49. As regards the submission of learned counsel for Respondent No.13 that the G.R. issued by G.A.D. is binding on all the Departments of the State Government and in support of which reliance is placed on the judgment of this Court in the case of State of Maharashtra and Ors. Vs. Ananda, (Writ Petition No.6212 of 2011), we have to state that, only when 44/48 WP-6631-9242-10150-17.doc ::: Uploaded on - 28/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2017 01:51:55 ::: there is no statutory provision, or, Legislation, or, Rules governing the field, the G.R. issued by G.A.D. can be binding. However, in the instant case, the field is already occupied by the Police Sub-Inspector (Recruitment) Rules, 1995, framed under the Maharashtra Police Act, and, therefore, as held above, the G.R., which is an executive fiat, issued in pursuance of the Proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution, cannot override the statutory provisions in the form of Rules herein.
Bombay High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 4 - J N Patel - Full Document

The State Of Maharashtra vs Shri Ananda Tukaram Akale And Tasgaon ... on 27 November, 2007

12. The Tribunal, however, vide its order dated 10th August 2016, granted interim relief to the Applicants by permitting them to appear for the competitive examinations, interpreting G.R. dated 25th April 2016, issued by the G.A.D., State of Maharashtra, increasing the age upto "38" and "43" 20/48 WP-6631-9242-10150-17.doc ::: Uploaded on - 28/09/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 29/09/2017 01:51:55 ::: years, respectively, for the 'open' and 'reserved' category candidates, in their favour and relying upon the decision of this Court in the case of State of Maharashtra Vs. Ananda and Anr., in Writ Petition No.6212 of 2011 dated 9th November 2011, wherein the Division Bench of this Court was pleased to hold that, 'The decision of the General Administration Department would be binding on all other Departments of the State Government, including the Public Works Department'.
Bombay High Court Cites 26 - Cited by 4 - V C Daga - Full Document
1   2 Next