Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 2522 (1.95 seconds)

Aman Kumar Gupta vs M/O Finance on 16 July, 2025

allocation and accordingly made allocation on merit-cum preference basis as per CBEC advice. These candidates could not be allocated Delhi zone because they were ... under the jurisdiction of Chandigarh Zone and Haryana was under the Delhi Zone of CBEC. To enable zones allocation to the candidates selected for various
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Brijesh Beniwal vs M/O Finance on 26 April, 2019

been allocated the zones as below:- Sl Name Cate Rank No. Preferences Zone No S/Shri -gory (in 2006 submitted at allocated exam) the time ... Zone is mentioned as under:- Category Rank No. of the 21 General Category candidates for vacancies for Jaipur CGLE, 2006 who Zone was allocated Jaipur
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Jai Parkash vs Union Of India on 22 April, 2014

meaning thereby that the candidates having better merit were to be allocated zones as per their preference before considering the preference of candidates having lesser ... applicants came to know that their merit position was ignored while allocating zones and it resulted in allocation of choice zones to such candidates
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 2 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Aashish Gupta vs M/O Finance on 27 January, 2025

between Delhi Zone and Chandigarh Zone on Merit-cum-preference basis. Accordingly, the Chief Commissioner, Delhi Zone had on their own, allocated 10 dossiers ... zone allocated. Accordingly, Zonal allocation of with-held candidates allocated in the year 2018 (directed by the Court and allocated by SSC) cannot be kept
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Manju Yadav vs Union Of India on 25 November, 2013

Delhi Zone and Ranchit Saxena and Vijay Kumar Sharma who were in Dapoli Division were reallocated to Delhi Zone and Jaipur Zone respectively. The said ... zone in the order (1) Delhi CX Zone (2) Lucknow CX Zone (3) Jaipur CS Zone (4) Chandigarh CX Zone (5) Mumbai CX Zone
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 5 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Sh. Vishnu Kumar Gupta vs Union Of India on 18 July, 2012

service that the respondents have ignored his merit position while allocating the zones inasmuch as that they failed to consider that as per the rules ... principle of merit-cum-preference and to declare their act of allocating zones against the rules as illegal and unjustified. He has also sought
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 4 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Nikhil Kumar vs M/O Finance on 29 March, 2016

which, zones were allocated to the candidates primarily on the basis of their permanent home address i.e. the allocated zone was nearest to their ... zone to them on their initial appointment in the year 2005. The main grievance of the applicants was that zone was allocated to them without
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Manish Kumar Pintu vs M/O Finance on 29 March, 2016

which, zones were allocated to the candidates primarily on the basis of their permanent home address i.e. the allocated zone was nearest to their ... zone to them on their initial appointment in the year 2005. The main grievance of the applicants was that zone was allocated to them without
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 28 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next