make fresh selection from amongst
those, who had applied pursuant to the advertisement
issued on 25.10.2008;
(b) Appointment would be strictly in accordance with ... pointed out
that the remaining vacancies, i.e., 12 posts, were re-advertised, on
8.5.2012, in daily newspapers as well as on the respondent
University
make fresh selection from amongst
those, who had applied pursuant to the advertisement
issued on 25.10.2008;
(b) Appointment would be strictly in accordance with ... pointed out
that the remaining vacancies, i.e., 12 posts, were re-advertised, on
8.5.2012, in daily newspapers as well as on the respondent
University
make fresh selection from amongst
those, who had applied pursuant to the advertisement
issued on 25.10.2008;
(b) Appointment would be strictly in accordance with ... pointed out
that the remaining vacancies, i.e., 12 posts, were re-advertised, on
8.5.2012, in daily newspapers as well as on the respondent
University
make fresh selection from amongst
those, who had applied pursuant to the advertisement
issued on 25.10.2008;
(b) Appointment would be strictly in accordance with ... pointed out
that the remaining vacancies, i.e., 12 posts, were re-advertised, on
8.5.2012, in daily newspapers as well as on the respondent
University
selection process
that was undertaken by the respondent-Company following the
Advertisement No.2 of 2015 in so far as the post ... submit that identical issues as
regarding the decision of the respondents to re-advertise the post of I.T.
Patna High Court CWJC No.3407
