Search Results for "Seniority"

891 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 891 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Court Upholds Recruitment Rules of 2015, Dismisses Petition Challenging RFO Seniority List. Petitioners' reliance on superseded 1998 Rules and failure to include all affected parties lead to dismissal; seniority list validated under 2015 Rules.

The petitioners challenged the seniority list based on the Recruitment Rules of 1998, arguing against the application of the Recruitment Rules of 2015...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds Appellant in Service Law Seniority Dispute Based on Select Panel Merit. Seniority of Direct Recruits Determined by Order of Merit in Select Panel Under DoPT OM Dated 3 July 1986, Not Date of Joining, as 1971 Rules Were Silent on Inter-Se Seniority for Combined All India List.

The dispute arose from the Military Engineering Service, where candidates were selected in 1983 for Superintendent posts across five Commands but some...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Direct Recruit District Judge's Claim for Seniority Over Promotees in Kerala Higher Judicial Service. Notional Seniority Granted from Date of Initial Appointment of Other Direct Recruits in Same Selection.

The case involves a dispute over seniority between direct recruit District Judges and promotees appointed by transfer in the Kerala Higher Judicial Se...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Direct Recruits' Appeal in Seniority Dispute — Date of Appointment Prevails Over Year of Vacancy. Promotees appointed on 01.03.2007 are senior to direct recruits appointed on 14.08.2007 and 24.11.2007 under the Manipur Police Service Rules, 1965.

The case involves an inter-se seniority dispute between promotees and direct recruits in the Manipur Police Service Grade II Officers Cadre. The promo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

High Court of Karnataka Upholds Transfer Rules for Teachers in Challenge Under Articles 226 and 227. Rules 5 and 19(2) of the Karnataka State Civil Services (Regulation of Transfer of Teachers) Rules, 2017 held valid and intra vires the parent Act and the Right to Education Act, 2009.

The judgment concerns a batch of writ petitions filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India challenging the constitutional validity ...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Dismisses Petition Challenging Ombudsman Report in Seniority Dispute — Seniority Determined by Date of Joining, Not Date of Recommendation by Public Service Commission.

The petitioners, including Maya M. Pednekar and others, filed a writ petition before the Bombay High Court at Goa challenging the report dated 16.02.2...