Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.18 seconds)

Dr. (Major) Meeta Sahai vs State Of Bihar on 17 December, 2019

14. This effectively seals the fate of the petitioners as nothing remains to be adjudicated in this respect that is, the legality or otherwise of Rule-4 of the 2013 Rules. The ratio of Dr. (Major) Meeta Sahai (supra) relied upon by Miss Rath would therefore not apply to facts of this case since there is nothing to show that the rule in question or the relevant Clause in the advertisement was illegal. The grievance raised in such respect earlier has already been addressed in the order passed in the common judgment. Said order has not been challenged in the higher forum. Hence, the petitioners cannot re-agitate the issue in the present writ application, that too in the garb of questioning the correctness of the rejection of their representations.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 78 - S Kant - Full Document
1