Created by Fuzzy Cloud | Our 2nd AI-Powered Solution
20 judgments · newest first · showing 1–20
The petitioner, Ramdev Singh, claimed ownership of a 21.8 decimal plot of land in Village Kehnichak, which had been in his family's possession for decades. He alleged that the State authorities, acting on the instructions of the Gram Panchayat Mukhiya, began illegal construction of a Panchayat …
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, who were candidates for Panchayat/Prakhand Teacher posts under the Bihar Panchayat Primary Teacher Rules of 2006 and 2008, were later appointed by District Appellate Authorities after vacancies arose post‑2012, but were denied salaries. The State Appellate Authority set aside those …
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 appellants, who were selected as Panchayat/Prakhand Teachers under the 2006‑2008 recruitment rules, were later appointed by the District Appellate Authority after vacancies arose post‑2012, but were denied salaries. The State Appellate Authority set aside those appointments and ordered …
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 petitioner, Sangam Kumari, filed a writ petition seeking a certiorari to quash a letter dated 16 January 2026 that deferred a requisition for a special meeting to discuss a no‑confidence motion against the Pramukh of Panchayat Samiti, Puranhiya, and also sought a mandamus directing the …
