Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
21 judgments · newest first · showing 1–21
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
The petitioners were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules (2006, 2008) who, after being placed on merit lists, were not appointed initially but later obtained appointments through District Appellate Authorities in 2016‑17. They were …
Dr. Sharmad, an Assistant Professor of Neurosurgery in Kerala's Medical Education Service, was promoted to Associate Professor on 6 February 2013. The promotion was challenged by a third respondent who argued that the promotion required five years of physical teaching experience as an Assistant …
The Kendriya Vidyalaya Sangathan (KVS) appointed certain teachers on an ad‑hoc basis to fill leave vacancies, stipulating that such appointments did not confer any right to regularisation. The teachers continued in service after the High Court’s interim orders and sought regularisation, invoking the …
The appellants, who had been working as Junior Commercial Clerks, were appointed on an ad‑hoc basis as Enquiry‑cum‑Reservation Clerks between 1978 and 1982 after the Railway Board changed its policy to fill the post by selection, favouring women candidates. When the railway later regularised the …
The petitioners filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the requirement to approach the Uttar Pradesh Public Services Tribunal (UP PST) for a service dispute, arguing that the Tribunal could not grant interim relief. The State contended that the Tribunal provided an alternative …
Baidyanath Mahapatra, a senior electrical engineer of the Orissa Government, was prematurely retired in 1983 under Rule 71(1)(a) of the Orissa Service Code based on a Review Committee's recommendation that relied on adverse entries in his service record, many of which were old, some communicated …
