Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
Gauhati High Court: Manojit Bhuyan, J., while allowing the present petition, directed to reinstate the petitioner on and from the date when
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench of Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Jyotsna Rewal Dua, JJ., while allowing the present petition in
Supreme Court: In the case relating to seniority of teachers appointed with Shri Samarth Shikshan Sansthan, the 3-judge bench of L. Nageswara
Supreme Court: A 3-Judge Bench of L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta and Ajay Rastogi, JJ. held that the candidates left out of
Supreme Court: In a case where a company provided trained and efficient security guards to clients, claimed that security guards were the employees of the client, the
Himachal Pradesh High Court: Chander Bhusan Barowalia, J., while allowing the present petition, held the impugned transfer order to be arbitrary and
Karnataka High Court: P.B. Bajanthri, while allowing the present writ petition against the termination of services without any disciplinary enquiry, reiterated the
Supreme Court: Stating that the essential qualifications for appointment to a post are for the employer to decide, the bench of Arun
Supreme Court: “The legitimate expectation is not a wish or a desire or a hope, therefore, it cannot be claimed or demanded
Supreme Court: In the issue relating to filling up of 4010 vacancies in the State of Uttar Pradesh, consisting of 3698 vacancies
Supreme Court: Holding that the decision taken by the Union of India not to make appointments to the Indian Police Service (IPS)
Supreme Court: Explaining the scope misconduct by employees, the bench of RK Agrawal and AM Sapre, JJ said that there is no
Supreme Court: Considering the pressing need of filling up the huge vacancy in police force, the bench of J.S.Khehar, CJ and Dr.
Supreme Court: Stating that the Court would fail in it’s duty if it did not took note of the grievance of the
Supreme Court: Stating that ‘transfer’ and ‘recruitment by transfer’ are entirely two different concepts, the Court said that no doubt transfer can
Supreme Court: In the case where the respondents who were initially engaged on casual basis and after one or two years were
Supreme Court: Answering the question as to whether the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) of an officer could be ignored for the purposes
Supreme Court: In the petition filed by the Physically Handicapped candidates belonging to Other Backward Classes (OBC), claiming that they are entitled
Calcutta High Court: In the matter where 71 petitioners had filed a writ application challenging the fixation of the cut-off date of
Allahabad High Court: Deciding a petition where a woman police constable was dismissed from service and deprived of all consequential benefits for