Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News
The Court held that the petitioner’s termination was based on a misapplication of the policy, as no qualified ST candidate was available, and therefore, no preference could have been applied.
If the Government servant has been terminated without adhering to Article 311 of the Constitution, then in such a case the provisions cannot be interpreted in favour of the State to deprive the employee of his legitimate claim.
Calcutta High Court opined that the Single Bench had appropriately safeguarded the interests of both parties by restraining termination pending the final outcome of the writ petitions.
Calcutta High Court detected procedural lapses, including discrepancies in the written exam, absent candidates, and hasty completion of the entire process.
The Calcutta High Court determined that the termination, despite being framed as simpliciter, was based on respondent’s alleged misconduct.
“Petitioner is conscious of the fact that he is a Christian and his marriage is with a Christian lady and the marriage is solemnized in a church as per the Christian rites and church formalities.”
Administrative Law — Subordinate/Delegated Legislation — Judicial Review/Validity of Subordinate/Delegated Legislation — Specific Pleadings — Necessity: For striking down statutory provision or
The post of Judicial Officer is a coveted one with responsibilities attached to it and one is expected to be unceremonious, prudent, and not take things in an easy manner.
The Manipur High Court opined that former MPCB’s Chairman should have obtained prior sanction from the State Government before appointing 118 employees as their monthly emoluments were above Rs. 3300 as per Rule 23 of Appointment of Chairman of Manipur Pollution Control Board, 2021.
Bombay High Court: The Division Bench of G.S. Patel and Gauri Godse, JJ. dismissed an appeal which was filed assailing an order
Delhi High Court: Noting allegations against an employer with regard to the sexual harassment Sanjeev Sachdeva, J., expressed that, “…instead of providing
Jharkhand High Court: Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J., dismissed the petition being devoid of merits. The facts of the case are such that
Delhi High Court: J.R. Midha, J. allowed a writ petition filed by the employer challenging the award of the Labour Court whereby the
Punjab and Haryana High Court: A Division Bench of Rajiv Sharma and Harinder Singh Sidhu JJ., set aside the decision of the
Calcutta High Court: Sahidullah Munshi, J. allowed a writ petition assigned before the Court on the request for reference by the Single
Himachal Pradesh High Court: A Division Bench comprising of Surya Kant, CJ and Ajay Mohan Goel, J. declared that even if there