Recruitment
15 judgments tagged with this keyword in the official report. Filter or search within these · Subject index
-
Legislative Council U.P. Lucknow & Ors. v. Sushil Kumar & Ors.
(1) Whether the Division Bench of the High Court while entertaining Special Appeal Defective No.485/2023 against the order of Single Judge along with Writ-A No.140/2022 was justified to direct the office to register a separate…
-
Union of India & Ors. v. Sajib Roy
Issue arose as regards the correctness of the order by the High Court permitting the respondents who had applied as reserved candidates in OBC category after having availed age relaxation for the post of Constable, to be…
-
Anjuman Ishaat-E-Taleem Trust v. The State of Maharashtra and Others
1) Whether the State can insist that a teacher seeking appointment in a minority educational institution must qualify the Teacher Eligibility Test (TET); If so, whether providing such a qualification would affect any of the…
-
Irwan Kour v. Punjab Public Service Commission & Ors.
Issue arose whether recruitment advertisement issued by the Punjab Public Service Commission providing reservation for “ex-servicemen” would include personnel from the Indian Military Nursing Service.
-
Sakshi Arha v. The Rajasthan High Court & Ors.
The present set of appeals have travelled to this 3-Judge Bench as a result of the split verdict delivered through Judgment dated 18.05.2023 in Civil Appeal No. 3957 of 2023 and other connected matters. All the candidates had…
-
Kousik Das & Ors. v. State of West Bengal & Ors.
Whether in light of the judgment of this Court in the case of Jaiveer Singh & Ors. v. The State of Uttarakhand & Ors. and the order of this Court in the case of Viswanath v. The State of Uttarakhand & Ors. the impugned judgment…
-
Tej Prakash Pathak & Ors. v. Rajasthan High Court & Ors.
(a) When the recruitment process commences and comes to an end; (b) Basis of the doctrine that ‘rules of the game’ must not be changed during the course of the game, or after the game is played; (c) Whether the decision in K.…
-
Shashi Bhushan Prasad Singh v. The State of Bihar and Others
Despite the preparation of the Final Select List which signals the conclusion of the appointment process, the State Government sought to scrap the entire process and undertake a fresh appointment process under the New Rules.…
-
Mahesh Chand Bareth & Anr. v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
Is Rule 13(v) of the Rajasthan Panchayati Raj Prabodhak Service Rules, 2008 , insofar as it provides age relaxation to the persons serving under educational projects discriminatory and contrary to Article 14 of the Constitution…
-
Abhimeet Sinha & Ors. v. High Court of Judicature at Patna & Ors.
Issue arose as regards the constitutionality of the Rules-Bihar Superior Judicial Service Rules, 1951 and Gujarat State Judicial Service Rules, 2005 stipulating minimum qualifying marks in the viva voce test as a part of the…
-
Ravindra Kumar v. State of U.P. & ORS.
There was a non-disclosure of a criminal case (in which the candidate was acquitted) in the verification form of the employment. The State cancelled the selection of the appellant. Was the State justified in cancelling the…
-
Smt. Vidya K. & Ors. v. State of Karnataka & Ors.
Whether a notification for filling up 18 posts of lecturers of Home Science in First Grade College run by State of Karnataka is liable to be quashed for not providing the breakup of the ‘subjects’ within Home Science.
-
Manoj Kumar v. Union of India & Ors.
The appellant sought appointment as a primary school teacher. The issue arising for consideration in the present case relates the allocation of marks for additional qualifications, for which 10 marks had been prescribed.
-
Radhey Shyam Yadav & Anr. Etc. v. State of U.P. & Ors.
Three appellants herein were appointed as Assistant Teachers at the Junior High School on 25.06.1999. From October, 2005, abruptly their salaries were stopped. Whether the State was justified in abruptly stopping their salary.
-
Vashist Narayan Kumar v. The State of Bihar & Ors.
Whether an error committed in the application form, which was uploaded is a material error or a trivial error and was the State justified in declaring the appellant as having failed on account of the same.