Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Since the selection for the post of regular Head Master, as mandated by Clause 3 of the Notification dated 2-3-2010 is made strictly based on seniority-cum-efficiency, then the logical corollary that flows from the aforesaid proposition, is that the appointment of an In-Charge Head Master must also adhere the same seniority-cum-efficiency principle.
The appointment of the petitioner to the 2008 Civil Services, based on the subsequent legislative reform made in 2016, would lead to administrative chaos and raise several complications regarding seniority, induction etc.
“This Court is inclined to dispose of this petition with a direction to the respondents No.2/3 to follow the proper procedure as prescribed under Rule 11.2 and 11.3 of the Rules of 2013.”
Formerly a Judge of Kerala High Court and Chief Justice of Patna High Court, Justice K. Vinod Chandran was appointed as Judge of Supreme Court in January 2025.
The Appointments Committee of the Cabinet appointed 11 new Presiding Officers and extended the additional charge arrangements of 8 existing Presiding Officers in various cities.
“The true thrust of every selection process ought to be to find out and select suitable candidates, having experience in the related work and fulfilling other criteria, from among eligible candidates and to go ahead with appointing the more meritorious of those found suitable”.
The respondent had filed original application before Central Administrative Tribunal challenging selection of Catering Supervisor based only on marks obtained in the interview and excluding marks of written test.
“Before reaching to the conclusion as to whether a person is unfit to be appointed in the Government job or not, each case is required to be scrutinized by the competent authorities considering the facts involved in that particular criminal case.”
Constitution of India — Art. 21 and Pt. III — Bail — Power of constitutional courts to grant — Scope of: Restrictive bail provision
The Supreme Court Collegium on 11-7-2024 recommended the name of Justice Manmohan as the next Chief Justice of the High Court of Delhi and the recommendation was confirmed on 21-9-2024.
“It will be improper to discriminate inter se among a homogenous group of students admitted for the academic session 2009-10. It could not be that those students admitted in the first round of counselling would be eligible, even with less than 50% marks in graduation, while the others admitted in the subsequent rounds of counselling would not be.”
As petitioner filed reply to the show cause notice and had already questioned the appointment of KPMG as Forensic Auditor and the Report, he is free to pursue the matter before SEBI in accordance with law.
In the competitive examinations, the candidates work hard and make their best efforts to secure good marks. Therefore, only because of the date of issuance of degree/certificate, they should not be denied appointment as these were only procedural delays/lapses.
In the administrative action where the decision of authority may result in civil consequences, a hearing before taking a decision is necessary.
Respondent 4 was in active practice and possessed cumulatively more than 7 years of active practice.
Justice Sanjeev Sachdeva will begin to perform the duties of Acting CJ consequent upon appointment of Justice Sheel Nagu, as the 66th Chief Justice of the Punjab and Haryana High Court.
In December 2023, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended Justice Sheel Nagu as the next Chief Justice of Punjab and Haryana High Court after the retirement of former Chief Justice, Justice Ravi Shanker Jha.
Supreme Court Collegium on 27-12-2023 recommended the appointment of Dr. Justice B R Sarangi, as next Chief Justice of Jharkhand High Court after the post fell vacant with the retirement of former Chief Justice, Justice Sanjaya Kumar Mishra on 28-12-2023.
The High Court directed the State to follow a uniform marks allocation process for the appointment of constables under AISF and reconsider the case of candidates having prior experience as home guards and SPOs.
Madhya Pradesh High Court held that non-inclusion of Professors/Head of the Department in selection committee amounts to violating the mandate of Madhya Pradesh Makhanlal Chaturvedi Rashtriya Patrakarita Avam Sanchar Vishwavidyalaya Adhiniyam, 1990.