Search Results for "Age relaxation"

475 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 475 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Dismisses Writ Petition Challenging CAT Order Denying Age Relaxation to Contract Employee. Petitioner Failed to Establish Legitimate Expectation for Age Relaxation Beyond Recruitment Rules for Field Investigator Post.

The petitioner, Dheeru Nayak, was initially appointed as a Field Investigator on contract basis in the National Sample Survey Organisation (NSSO) unde...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Dismisses Writ Appeal Challenging Age Limit for Panchayat Clerk Recruitment — Age Relaxation Cannot Exceed Notification Prescription. Appellant Overaged by 2 Years as per Notification Dated 29.03.2018 for SC/ST/MBC Category with Maximum Age of 35 Years.

The appellant, Y. Simiyon, filed a writ appeal against the order dated 31.01.2025 in W.P.No.6582 of 2020, which dismissed his challenge to the rejecti...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Age Relaxation Denial for EWS Candidates in Judicial Recruitment. EWS Category Not Entitled to Age Relaxation Under Maharashtra Judicial Service Rules, 2008 as Relaxation Only for Backward Classes.

The petitioners, four individuals belonging to the Economically Weaker Section (EWS), challenged a communication dated 31st January 2022 from the Bomb...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Hears Kotwals' Writ Petition Against Age Bar; Applies COVID-19 Relaxation GR to Group D Absorption. The Court Found That Government Resolution Dated 17.12.2021 Should Be Interpreted Liberally to Include All Kotwals Affected by Recruitment Delays, Ensuring No Anomalous Exclusion.

The petitioners, eleven Kotwals working on honorarium in Aurangabad district, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court challenging an order ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Madras High Court Allows State’s Appeal, Sets Aside Single Judge’s Order for Retrospective Promotion under G.O.Ms.No.1170. Court holds that relaxation of service rules is discretionary, cannot be claimed as right, and cannot be applied retrospectively after retirement.

The matter arose from a service dispute wherein a Panchayat Assistant, appointed in 1979 and later transferred as Junior Assistant in 1999 under a 10%...