Search Results for "Relaxation"

144 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 144 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows FCI Appeal in Appointment Dispute Over Experience Certificate Requirement. The Court held that essential eligibility criteria must be strictly complied with and subsequent production of certificates cannot cure initial deficiency.

The case involves an appeal by the Food Corporation of India (FCI) against a Division Bench judgment of the Delhi High Court that directed FCI to appo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows State's Appeal Against High Court Review Order in Voluntary Retirement Case. High Court Exceeded Review Jurisdiction by Reinterpreting Rule 75 of West Bengal Service Rules, 1971 Without Error Apparent on Record.

The case involves the interpretation of Rule 75 of the West Bengal Service Rules, 1971, concerning voluntary retirement. The respondent, Dr. Tonmoy Mo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal by ECIL, Restores Single Judge Order Denying Age Relaxation to Outsourced Workers. Division Bench's Direction to Permit Participation in Selection Set Aside as Respondents Were Not Entitled to Age Relaxation Under Notification.

The case involves an appeal by The Electronic Corporation of India Ltd. (ECIL) against a judgment of the Division Bench of the High Court of Judicatur...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Partial Relaxation of Certificate Requirement in Technician Grade-2 Recruitment. Relaxation of eligibility condition without advertisement mention is impermissible, but first relaxation upheld in larger public interest due to certificate issuance delays.

The appeals arose from the selection and appointment to the post of Technician Grade-2 (Apprenticeship Electrical) in the Uttar Pradesh Power Corporat...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Age Limit and Recruitment Interval Rules for Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service. Rules 8(1) and 12 of UPHJS Rules, 1975 Held Valid as Not Manifestly Arbitrary Under Articles 14 and 16.

The Supreme Court considered the constitutional validity of Rules 8(1) and 12 of the Uttar Pradesh Higher Judicial Service Rules, 1975. The petitioner...