Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 9 of 9 (0.25 seconds)

Madan Lal vs State Of J&K on 6 August, 1997

[22]. Yet another ground on which the petitioners are not entitled to challenge the selection criteria is that knowing well about the selection process, they participated therein without any demur or protest. It is only after they remained unsuccessful, the petitioners sought to challenge the process of selection in the present writ petitions. This is not permissible in view of law laid down by Apex Court in the case of Madan Lal Vs. State of J&K reported in (1995)3 SCC 486 wherein, dealing with somewhat similar situation, the Court held as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 11 - Cited by 320 - G N Ray - Full Document

Om Prakash Shukla vs Akhilesh Kumar Shukla & Ors on 18 March, 1986

In the case of Om PrakashShukla v. Akhilesh Kumar Shukla [1986 Supp SCC 285 : 1986 SCC (L&S) 644 : AIR 1986 SC 1043] it has been clearly laid down by a Bench of three learned Judges of this Court that when the petitioner appeared at Signature Not Verified Signed by: VIPIN KUMAR AGRAHARI Signing time: 10/29/2025 6:30:58 PM NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-GWL:27117 12 the examination without protest and when he found that he would not succeed in examination he filed a petition challenging the said examination, the High Court should not have granted any relief to such a petitioner."
Supreme Court of India Cites 3 - Cited by 652 - E S Venkataramiah - Full Document

M.P. Public Service Commission vs Navnit Kumar Potdar on 19 September, 1994

[28]. The Apex Court in the case of M.P. Public Service Commission Vs. Navnit Kumar Potdar reported in (1994)6 SCC 293, was considering the validity of an order, issued by the Commission raising the period of practice as an advocate from five years to seven and half years while calling applicants for interview, for appointments against the posts of Presiding Officers of the Labour Courts. The Court held thus:
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 199 - N P Singh - Full Document
1