Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.95 seconds)

Prem Singh And Others vs Haryana State Electricity Board And ... on 7 May, 1996

Most   significantly,   he   has  not   even   claimed   that   his   name   be   considered   for  appointment. The prayers made by the petitioner seek  no affirmative action concerning himself but seek to  negative   the   appointments   of   respondents   Nos.3   to   7  or,   in   the   alternative,   of   respondents   Nos.5   to   7.  Taking   into   consideration   the   aspect   that   the  additional   three   posts   were   created   post.   the  advertisement for two posts, due to a dire requirement  in the Hospital and were filled up from the same pool  of   candidates   who   participated   in   the   selection  process in which the petitioner was unsuccessful, and  keeping   in   view   the   larger   public   interest   and   the  principles of law laid down by the Supreme Court in  the   case   of  Prem   Singh   &   Ors.   Vs.  Haryana   State   Electricity Board & Ors (supra),  the prayers made in  the   petition   cannot   be   accepted.   Sufficient   reasons  have   been   given   by   respondent   No.2   to   show   the  emergent circumstances that led to the action of the  respondent   authorities,   to   bring   it   within   the  exception carved out by the Supreme Court in the above  judgment. Under the circumstances, to strike down the  appointments   of   respondents   Nos.3   to   7  would  not   be  Page 24 of 25 HC-NIC Page 24 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT justified.
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 935 - G T Nanavati - Full Document

State Of Bihar And Others vs The Secretariat Assistant Successful ... on 8 November, 1993

"13. Filling up of vacancies over and above  the number of vacancies advertised would be  violative of the fundamental rights granted  under   Articles   14   and   16   of   the  Constitution. (See: Union of India and Ors.  v.   Ishwar   Singh   Khatri   and   Ors.,   Gujarat  Page 8 of 25 HC-NIC Page 8 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT State   Dy.   Executive   Engineers,   Association   v. State of Gujarat and Ors.State of Bihar   and   Ors.   v.   the   Secretariat   Assistant   S.E.  Union, 1986 and Ors., Prem Singh and Ors. v.   Haryana   State   Electricity   Board   and   Ors.Surendra  Singh  and   Ors.  v.  State  of  Punjab  and Anr. and Kamlesh Kumar Sharma v. Yogesh  Kumar Gupta and Ors."
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 142 - M N Venkatachaliah - Full Document

Kamlesh Kumar Sharma vs Yogesh Kumar Gupta & Ors on 9 February, 1998

"13. Filling up of vacancies over and above  the number of vacancies advertised would be  violative of the fundamental rights granted  under   Articles   14   and   16   of   the  Constitution. (See: Union of India and Ors.  v.   Ishwar   Singh   Khatri   and   Ors.,   Gujarat  Page 8 of 25 HC-NIC Page 8 of 25 Created On Wed Aug 17 02:21:03 IST 2016 C/SCA/3732/2011 CAV JUDGMENT State   Dy.   Executive   Engineers,   Association   v. State of Gujarat and Ors.State of Bihar   and   Ors.   v.   the   Secretariat   Assistant   S.E.  Union, 1986 and Ors., Prem Singh and Ors. v.   Haryana   State   Electricity   Board   and   Ors.Surendra  Singh  and   Ors.  v.  State  of  Punjab  and Anr. and Kamlesh Kumar Sharma v. Yogesh  Kumar Gupta and Ors."
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 74 - Full Document

Kailash Chander Sharma vs State Of Haryana And Ors on 16 November, 1989

The proceedings of the  Full Court meeting dated 24­11­90 would show  that the Full Court finalised the selection  for filling up 32 vacancies only and sent a   list   of   32   candidates   in   order   of   merit.  However,   a   further   resolution   was   passed  that if any further vacancy in the quota of   the   direct   recruits   was   required   to   be   filled   up   within   a   period   of   one   year   the  same   be   filled   up   by   recommending   the  candidates   in   order   of   merit   from   amongst  the remaining candidates in the merit list.  It   is   therefore   crystal   clear   that   the   advertisement   and   the   whole   selection  process that ensued were meant only to fill  up   32   vacancies.   Learned   counsel   for   the   respondents relying on the decisions of this  Court in Kailash Chandra Sharma v. State of  Haryana.
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 22 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document
1   2 Next