Judgments - Appointment
PRAVEEN KUMAR C.P. VERSUS KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION COMMISSION & ORS.
Prem Narayan Singh and Ors. Versus Hon’ble High Court of Madhya Pradesh
Amar Dev Pandey Vs. The State of Bihar
Arun Singh Chouhan Vs. State of MP & Ors.
Law laid down - Article 226 of the Constitution – Writ of Quo Warranto - Can be issued to test the validity of appointment to a public office. The said writ cannot be issued to examine the posting or working of an officer to particular place. Writ of Quo Warranto – Necessary party - The person against whom writ is prayed for is a necessary party. Public Interest Litigation – Conduct of petitioner - A practising Advocate has chosen not to answer the Full Judgment
Rashi Mani Mishra and others Versus State of Uttar Pradesh and others
ARUNA VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND OTHERS
Arvind Kumar Tiwari & Ors. Versus The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors.
Saroj Dehariya Vs. The State of Madhya Pradesh and others
Law Laid Down:- The intention behind enacting the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995 as well as the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016 is to give a succour to those upon whom the destiny has inflicted various kinds of disabilities and to provide them an opportunity to participate in the social milieu like any other able bodied person. Despite progressive steps taken by the Courts and the initiatives taken by the Government, the Full Judgment
DELHI SUBORDINATE SERVICES SELECTION BOARD & ANR. VERSUS SEEMA KAPOOR
GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR VERSUS SH PAWAN
ANKIT TIWARI AND OTHERS vs. HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANOTHER
Law laid down - (i) Publication of key answers along with the result of the test is desirable in the interest of fairness and that correctness of key answers should be ascertained from the standard and prescribed text books and not merely on the basis of inferences. (ii) In a competitive examination candidates cannot be made to suffer on account of the errors committed by the examining body and to avoid any such gross injustice, re-evaluation can be directed. (iii) Such re-evaluation and Full Judgment
Laxman Singh Baghel Vs. State of M.P. & Anr.
Law laid down:- Disqualification contemplated u/R.6(6) of the Madhya Pradesh Civil Services [General Conditions of Services] Rules 1961 is to be adjudged for the purpose of appointment and therefore even if the candidate had not incurred disqualification u/R.6(6) of 1961 Rules on the last date of submission of application forms but thereafter incurred disqualification before being appointed, the candidate would still be disqualified for being appointed. Full Judgment