Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
S. B. SINHA
State of Nagaland – Appellant
Versus
Toulvi Kibami – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
In the State of Nagaland, the promotion of Superintending Engineer to the post of Additional Chief Engineer in the Department of Public Health and Engineering is governed by the service rules known as Nagaland Engineering Services Rules, 1977 (Class I and II) (hereinafter referred to as "the rules"). The Respondent No. 2 in C.A.No. 2533/1998 (and appellant in C.A.No. 2536/1998 is a diploma-holder and at the relevant time was working as officiating Superintendent Engineer. On 26.3.1991, the Government of Nagaland promoted respondent No. 2 as Additional Chief Engineer. This promotion was challenged by respondent No. 1 who is a degree-holder by means of a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution on the ground that respondent No. 2 was not eligible for being promoted to the post of Additional Chief Engineer as the said post is to be filled up 100 per cent from amongst the degree-holders. This contention of respondent No. 1 was accepted by the learned Single Judge of the High Court. Consequently, the promotion of respondent No. 2 was set aside. Aggrieved, the State of Nagaland preferred a letters patent appeal which was allowed and order and judgment of
When a judgment of Court was acted upon and it stood exhausted, review petition should not be entertained.
The debarring of the petitioners from promotion based on their engineering discipline violated their fundamental rights under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution, and was deemed arbitrary and unre....
The court ruled that excluding diploma holders in Mechanical Engineering from promotion based solely on their qualification is arbitrary and violates Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.
The court affirmed that a petitioner cannot challenge regulations under which they themselves were promoted, and that amendments made by the State were valid under the governing Act.
Promotions under the Assam Engineering (Irrigation Department) Service Rules take effect from the date granted, not from the date of vacancy, and no retrospective promotion is allowed post-retirement....
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.