Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.68 seconds)
Neutral Citation ... vs The State Of Jharkhand on 4 December, 2025 cites

Sachin Kumar vs Delhi Subordinate Service Selection ... on 3 March, 2021

15. The learned Writ Court after considering the material on records came to a categorical conclusion that it was difficult for the Court to segregate the tainted candidates from the untainted candidates and, therefore, the respondents are well within their right to have cancelled the selection process which was in tune with the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sachin Kumar & Ors Vs. Delhi Subordinate Service Commission Board & Ors, reported in (2021) 4 SCC 631.
Supreme Court of India Cites 25 - Cited by 37 - D Y Chandrachud - Full Document

Union Territory Of Chandigarh vs Dilbagh Singh And Ors on 3 November, 1992

Furthermore, the learned Writ Court after placing reliance on the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union Territory of Chandigarh Vs. Dilbagh Singh reported in (1993) 1 SCC 154 and another judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India Vs. Tarun K. Singh reported in (2003) 11 SCC 768, held that since the petitioners do not acquire an indefeasible right to be appointed merely on account of their names figuring in the first merit list, segregating the selection process in such circumstances, would tantamount to perpetuating the illegal and unfair malpractices adopted in the selection process itself.
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 160 - Full Document

Employees State Insurance ... vs Dr. Vinay Kumar on 18 May, 2022

In Dr. Vinay Kumar's case (supra) also, the Hon'ble Supreme Court emphasized that applicant does not have a legal right to insist that the recruitment process, once set in motion, be carried to its logical conclusion and such a right may not be given even upon the inclusion of a candidate in the select list. The Court, however, made it clear that exercise of such power would be subject to genuine principle against arbitrariness in administrative action.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 16 - Full Document
1