Search Results Page

Search Results

91 - 100 of 3059 (1.52 seconds)

Vilas Giridhar Patil vs M/O Railways on 5 January, 2018

their notification at para 9 was a typographical error and that the Board's guidelines of 31.08.2006 will supersede all such instructions that ... notification issued by the respondent no. 2 which was admittedly a typographical error. They again assert that the post of Jr Engineer is a supervisory
Central Administrative Tribunal - Mumbai Cites 3 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

M Manjunatha Rao vs South Western Railway on 28 November, 2018

Annexure-R5). Thus it is clarified that there is no typographical error in notifying the vacancies with medical classification against each category of post notified ... medically examined in A-II categories. Hence, there is no typographical error as averred by the applicant. Thus 78 vacancies notified for Hamal/Porter/Sweeper
Central Administrative Tribunal - Bangalore Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
Previous   6 7 8 9 10   11 12 13 14 15 Next