Search Results for "consideration for promotion"

13 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 13 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 Petitioners' reliance on superseded 1998 Rules and failure to include all affected parties lead to dismissal; seniority list validated under 2015 Rules.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 Rules on Retrospective Promotion Claims in Bihar State Electricity Board Case. Promotion Rights Considered Fundamental, but Not Absolute; Seniority Cannot Be Backdated Without Vacancy.

The Supreme Court of India, in Civil Appeal No. 6977 of 2015 filed by the Bihar State Electricity Board, addressed the issue of retrospective promoti...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Clarification on Promotion Policies for Chargeman and Foreman Positions. Understanding the rationale behind promotion decisions and addressing delays in challenging seniority placements.

Writ Petition challenging a judgment and order of the Central Administrative Tribunal regarding promotions within the Indian Navy's Artisan Staff. The...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Service Law Promotion Dispute Due to Lapse of Time and Settled Positions. Promotion Reversion Order Set Aside by High Court Upheld as Interference Could Unsettle Service Hierarchy After 15 Years, Involving ACR Benchmark and Natural Justice Issues.

The dispute arose between two employees serving in the Department of Technical Education and Industrial Training, Punjab, concerning the promotion and...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Allows Appeals in Seniority Dispute, Quashing High Court Division Bench Judgment. Seniority lists prepared based on date of dispatch of select lists were held arbitrary and contrary to Rule 5 of Uttar Pradesh Government Servants Seniority Rules, 1991, requiring fresh merit-based list.

The dispute arose from seniority lists dated 05.09.2006 and 05.03.2010 for Junior Engineers in the Department of Minor Irrigation, Uttar Pradesh, invo...