Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.24 seconds)Article 227 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Employees State Insurance Corporation vs All India I.T.D.C. Employees Union & Ors on 24 March, 2006
13. Therefore, there is an apparent conflict between the
advertisement and the guidelines issued by the Government. It
is the settled position of law that in such situation, the
guidelines will prevail. Reference in this regard may be had to
Page 9 of 16
The Employees' State Insurance Corporation v. Union of
India & Ors.,2, wherein the apex Court held as follows:-
Malik Mazhar Sultan vs U.P. Public Service Commission Through ... on 26 September, 2023
In Ashish Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh a two-
judge Bench of this Court followed the decision in Malik
2
(2022) 1 SCR 373
Page 10 of 16
Mazhar Sultan (supra) in interpreting an advertisement
issued by the Director, Social Welfare Department, Uttar
Pradesh for the position of a psychologist. This Court
declined to give precedence to the erroneous
qualifications prescribed in the advertisement against
the relevant recruitment rules and held:
Ashish Kumar vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 31 January, 2018
In Ashish Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh a two-
judge Bench of this Court followed the decision in Malik
2
(2022) 1 SCR 373
Page 10 of 16
Mazhar Sultan (supra) in interpreting an advertisement
issued by the Director, Social Welfare Department, Uttar
Pradesh for the position of a psychologist. This Court
declined to give precedence to the erroneous
qualifications prescribed in the advertisement against
the relevant recruitment rules and held:
Namita Panda vs State Of Odisha And Others .... Opposite ... on 7 February, 2022
In the case of Smita Panda (supra) cited by learned
counsel for opposite party No.6, the applicant therein had not
submitted disability certificate before the last date of
submission of application. The present case stands on a
different footing inasmuch as the petitioner had submitted a
resident certificate, which this Court referring to the guidelines
dated 15.03.2023 has held to be valid. So this is not a case
Page 13 of 16
where no certificate had been submitted. The said judgment is
therefore, not applicable.
1