Pimputkar and Anr. v. Laxman Purshottam Pimputkar and Ors. , wherein ejusdem generis rule has been applied by the Supreme Court.
13. I am in agreement ... suitable candidates" The ejusdem generis rule as applied by the Supreme Court in George Dc Costa v. Controller of Estate Duty Mysore
Rules, 1975 (hereinafter, Rules of 1975).
Moreover, in the advertisement so issued by the respondent-RPSC,
it was expressly stated that for availing the DC ... noted that as per Rule 20
of the Rules of 1999, it is abundantly clear that the said Rule is
subject to the reservation
same and also furnished an affidavit before the DC(A) however, the learned DC(A) was not satisfied with the explanation offered by the respondent ... there is a categorical finding of the DC(A) that there is no violation of Rule 50. When there is clear cut finding
before the Dy. Commissioner
(Appeals), the said facts were reiterated, however, the
DC(A) was not satisfied and sustained the penalty.
4. On a further ... passed by both, the AO and DC(A).
5. Learned counsel for the Revenue vehemently
contended that Rule 53 gives power to Revenue to
inspect
before the Dy. Commissioner
(Appeals), the said facts were reiterated, however, the
DC(A) was not satisfied and sustained the penalty.
4. On a further ... passed by both, the AO and DC(A).
5. Learned counsel for the Revenue vehemently
contended that Rule 53 gives power to Revenue to
inspect
before the Dy. Commissioner
(Appeals), the said facts were reiterated, however, the
DC(A) was not satisfied and sustained the penalty.
4. On a further ... passed by both, the AO and DC(A).
5. Learned counsel for the Revenue vehemently
contended that Rule 53 gives power to Revenue to
inspect
before the Dy. Commissioner
(Appeals), the said facts were reiterated, however, the
DC(A) was not satisfied and sustained the penalty.
4. On a further ... passed by both, the AO and DC(A).
5. Learned counsel for the Revenue vehemently
contended that Rule 53 gives power to Revenue to
inspect
there was violation of provisions of
Rule 50 of the RST Rules, 1995. However, the DC(A)
being not satisfied with the explanation offered ... accepted the contention of assessee and held
that there is violation of Rule 50 and that there was
no signature
Rajasthan Commercial
Taxes Sub-ordinate Services, applied as a Departmental Candidate
(DC) in RAS Combined Competitive Examination-2018 and stood
qualified but, his candidature ... Rule 6 of the Rajasthan Commercial Taxes
Sub-ordinate Services (General Branch) Rules, 1975, learned
counsel submitted that a DC can apply for appointment
Service Rules, 1975(here in after to be referred as 'the Rules') through a Notification viz., Department of Personnel (A-II) Notification ... DC. on probation of two years vide order dated September 24, 1982 (Annexure-1) meant to be under the Rules. Vide letter dated October
