Creation and/or sanction of the posts is the sole prerogative of Government; Courts cannot interfere: Supreme Court
Framing of any scheme is no function of the Court and is the sole prerogative of the Government.
Framing of any scheme is no function of the Court and is the sole prerogative of the Government.
Madras High Court: V. Parthiban, J., expressed that plea of public interest in a private loan transaction is only a mask to
Kerala High Court: T.R. Ravi, J., held that draft stipulation could not be accepted for the challenge as the same is premature
“Judicial review of a policy decision and to issue mandamus to frame policy in a particular manner are absolutely different.”
“What is being claimed and prayed for under the guise of Covid 19 pandemic is nothing but a lame excuse in taking additional attempt to participate in the Civil Service Examination 2021 to be held in future.”
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench of Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Sandeep Sharma, JJ., while dismissing the present petition said, “The
Chhattisgarh High Court: Sanjay K. Agrawal J. dismissed the petition based on settled position of law. The facts of the case are
Supreme Court: The bench of Indira Banjerjee and Indu Malhotra, JJ that the Courts are duty bound to issue a writ of
Jharkhand High Court: A Division Bench of Aparesh Kumar Singh and Kailash Prasad Deo, JJ. was hearing a writ petition of mandamus
Uttaranchal High Court: A writ petition was contemplated by Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ and Alok Kumar Verma, J. where the petitioner sought a
Allahabad High Court: Rajesh Singh Chauhan, J. while allowing the writ petition issued a writ in the nature of mandamus so as to
Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Ramesh Ranganathan, CJM and Alok Kumar Verma, J. dismissed a writ petition where the petitioner
Uttaranchal High Court: The instant writ petition was entertained by a Division Bench of Ramesh Ranganathan, C.J. and Alok Kumar Verma, J.,
Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Alok Singh and N.S. Dhanik, JJ. dismissed a writ petition filed by the 66-year-old petitioner,
Madras High Court: Pushpa Sathyanaryana, J. while hearing a petition praying for mandamus against an insurance company, directed the said insurance company
Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: M.M.A. Gaffoor, J. allowed a land owner’s application seeking mandamus for
Patna High Court: A Division Bench of Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ and Anjana Mishra, J. denied dismissed a petition filed for consideration
Court of Appeal of the Democratic Socialist Republic of Sri Lanka: Mahinda Samayawardhena, J. entertained a writ petition where the petitioner sought,
Uttaranchal High Court: A Division Bench of Ramesh Ranganathan, CJ and N.S. Dhanik, J. entertained a PIL which sought mandamus to direct
Allahabad High Court: The Bench of B. Amit Sthalekar and Piyush Agrawal, JJ., dismissed a civil writ petition, seeking certain reliefs on