Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 60 (0.59 seconds)

S Nakkeeran vs M/O Defence on 30 April, 2026

Selection Committee on the basis that there was no minimum marks for interview. Therefore, the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that after the whole ... minimum marks for the interview, introduction of the requirement of minimum marks for interview, after the entire selection process (consisting of written examination and interview
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 18 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

J Vignesh vs Shri Vashishta Johri on 4 April, 2018

selection strictly on merits would have entailed even higher minimum qualifying marks. The minimum qualifying marks of 60% each in both written test and viva ... minimum qualifying marks was valid, the applicant had secured 49% in the written test alone and if granted opportunity of an interview, he would have
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

B Sankar vs Ut Of Pondicherry on 12 August, 2025

selection process. The interviews were scheduled for the other candidates, but the applicant did not receive the Interview letter or Memo and hence he submitted ... stating that the applicant did not possess the requisite percentage of 50% marks in HSC and rejected his case under the category of Lacking Essential
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

G Manivannan vs M/O Defence on 29 March, 2019

respondents, the applicant failed in procuring the minimum marks and he obtained only 15 marks and hence he was not selected. There had occurred ... ratio of 1:5 and the persons were called for interview and selection was conducted. According to them, the rules for recruitment was amended
Central Administrative Tribunal - Madras Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next