Search Results for "Maharashtra Judicial Service Rules"

1072 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 1072 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 Petitioners' reliance on superseded 1998 Rules and failure to include all affected parties lead to dismissal; seniority list validated under 2015 Rules.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 of India: Judgment on Regulation and Approval of Genetically Modified Crops. Ensuring adherence to environmental safety, legal standards, and public health in the approval process for GM crops in India.

The Supreme Court of India concerning various writ petitions filed in public interest related to the regulation and approval of Genetically Modified (...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeal of Judicial Officer Discharged During Probation and Quashes Discharge Order. Discharge Based on Bail Order and Pending Inquiry Without Hearing Violates Natural Justice and Is Arbitrary Under Rajasthan Judicial Services Rules, 2010 and Article 233 of Constitution of India.

The dispute involved a judicial officer appointed as an Additional District Judge in 2013 under the Rajasthan Judicial Services Rules, 2010, who was d...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Upholds 2020 Tribunal Rules with Modifications to Ensure Judicial Independence. Court directs changes to Search-cum-Selection Committee composition and member qualifications to align with constitutional principles.

The Supreme Court of India was called upon to decide the constitutional validity of the Tribunal, Appellate Tribunal and other Authorities (Qualificat...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Bombay High Court Quashes Compulsory Retirement of District Judge for Non-Application of Mind and Violation of Natural Justice. Premature Retirement Order Set Aside as Review Committee Failed to Consider Entire Service Record and Adverse Remarks Were Not Communicated.

The Petitioner, a District Judge, challenged his compulsory retirement from service on attaining the age of 55 years, by an order dated 12/07/2018. He...