Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 22 (0.97 seconds)
Harwinder Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Others on 31 July, 2024 cites

Devesh Sharma vs Union Of India And 2 Others on 15 December, 2020

iii) Mr. Vikas Chatrath, Advocate for respondent Nos. 11 to 24 (in CWP No.17740 of 2021) contends that respondent Nos. 11 to 24 are B.Ed qualified candidates and a large number of candidates who have possessed the qualification of B.Ed have passed the Bridge Course , which was one of the essential feature for the purposes of selection and appointment as ETT Teachers in terms of the notification issued by NCTE , therefore, the rights of said candidates stood crystalized and the same cannot be taken away since order passed in review application in Devesh Sharma's Sharma' case also holds that the candidates who stood appointed would have to pass Bridge Course , whereas the candidates who have passed the Bridge Course cannot be denied appointment being an exception carved out. Therefore, he contends that the respondents are are entitled to the protection.
Allahabad High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 55 - S Srivastava - Full Document

Ajit Singh And Ors vs State Of Punjab And Ors on 16 September, 1999

Sd/-Assistant Director, Education Recruitment Directorate, Punjab 30.07.2021 As per the above reproduced advertisement only ETT qualified candidates were eligible to apply, apply whereas, B.Ed qualified candidates were not. B.Ed qualified candidates filed CWP-15486-2021, CWP 2021, titled as ''Harwinder inder Singh & Others Vs. State of Punjab and Others' Others' and CWP CWP-16213-2021, titled as 'Manisha Manisha Sharma & Ors.
Supreme Court of India Cites 38 - Cited by 601 - M J Rao - Full Document
1   2 3 Next