“Purpose of examination is to screen out best candidates available for job and since petitioner obtained more than minimum required marks, he should have been considered for Stage-II under General Category as his rejection is not based on merit but only on account of document verification.”
Bombay High Court: In a case filed by Swapnil Prakash Parab (‘petitioner’) challenging rejection to the representation made before Bhabha
Rajasthan High Court: A Division Bench of Anoop Kumar Dhand and Pankaj Bharadwaj, JJ., disposed of the petition and directed the Department
Gauhati High Court: Manojit Bhuyan J., simplifying the applicability of Rule 3 and Rule 4 of Assam Public Service (Preferential Appointment) Rules,
Supreme Court: The 3-judge bench of SA Bobde, CJ* and AS Bopanna and V. Ramasubramanian, JJ, while upholding Allahabad High Court’s order
Ex-BSF Jawan Tej Bahadur’s nominations were rejected by the returning officer for want of a certificate to the effect that he has not been dismissed for corruption or disloyalty to the State.
Patna High Court: The Division Bench of Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ and Anjana Mishra, J. rejected an appeal filed by a candidate
Rajasthan High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Arun Bhansali, J. dismissed a plea against the grant of inadequate time to