Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 33 (0.28 seconds)
Mallapardhasaradhi vs State Of Punjab And Others Reported In on 30 December, 2025 cites

Dr. Ashok Kumar Srivastava @ Ashok Kumar ... vs The State Of Bihar on 9 August, 2023

150. It is stated that the unsuccessful examinees who have not even qualified in the screening examination had filed writ petitions questioning the validity of the notification and the same is not bona fide. A Judgment of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Ashok Kumar and another v. State of Bihar and others3 was relied upon to sustain the said plea.
Patna High Court Cites 34 - Cited by 0 - C S Singh - Full Document

Malik Mazhar Sultan vs U.P. Public Service Commission Through ... on 26 September, 2023

In Malik Mazhar Sultan v. U.P. Public Service Commission,5 the Hon‟ble Supreme Court was considering a dispute regarding upper age of the applicant vis-a- vis the recruitment notification and the Rules. It was held that error in the advertisement/ notification regarding upper age would not create any right as recruitment can only be as per the Rules. Paragraph 21 thereof is extracted below;
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 7 - D Y Chandrachud - Full Document

Public Service ... vs Mamta Bisht And Ors on 3 June, 2010

In the light of the judgments of the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in Anil Kumar Gupta, Rajesh Kumar Daria and Public Service Commission, Uttaranchal v. Mamta Bist 2010 (12) SCC 204 and Janhit Abhiyan v. Union of India regarding the manner in which the horizontal reservation was to be filled up, a Committee 73 was constituted by the State Government vide G.O.Ms.No.140, G.A.(Ser.D) Department, dated 16.11.2022 to examine the same. On the basis of the report of the Committee dated 10.04.2023, amendments were made to Rule 22 of the Rules, 1996 and a new roster was issued fixing reservation points only for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and EWs and Backward Classes.
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 316 - B S Chauhan - Full Document
1   2 3 4 Next