Search Results for "suitability test"

8 result(s) found

Scroll Down To Discover

Found 8 result(s)

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Modifies Expulsion of Bihar MLC to Suspension, Reinstates Dr. Sunil Kumar Singh – Proportionality in Legislative Punishment Under Scrutiny. Court Invokes Article 142 to Ensure Proportionality in Legislative Discipline, Reinstates Petitioner After 7 Months of Expulsion

Maintainability of Writ Petition: The Court held that the Writ Petition is maintainable as Article 212(1) does not bar judicial review of legislative...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Set Aside High Court’s Order Directing Compassionate Appointment – Lump Sum Ex-Gratia Granted Under Article 142. Compassionate Appointment – Financial Condition Consideration – High Court Erred in Overlooking Suitability Criterion – Article 142 Invoked for Equitable Relief

Acts And Sections Discussed Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 142 – Extraordinary Power Exercised for Equitable Relief – Para 49 Civil P...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Promotion and Seniority in Judicial Services: A Fair Review. Restoring justice for promotion and seniority in Jharkhand Superior Judicial Service.

The Supreme Court of India held that judicial officers who successfully qualified for the suitability test for promotion under the 65% promotional quo...

© Image Copyrights Juris Services & Technology

Supreme Court Quashes High Court Resolution on Seniority of District Judges Promoted Through Limited Competitive Examination. Merit-Based Seniority Upheld as Administrative Committee's Decision Contravened Supreme Court Directives and Madhya Pradesh Higher Judicial Services Rules, 1994.

The dispute concerned District Judges in Madhya Pradesh who were appointed to the Higher Judicial Services through Limited Competitive Examinations (L...

© 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...