SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1984 Supreme(AP) 514

A.LAKSHMANA RAO, P.CHENNAKESAVA REDDY
S. Jaffer Saheb – Appellant
Versus
State OF A. P. rep. by Chief Secretary, to Government Secretariat, Hyd. – Respondent


( 1 ) IN these writ petitions, the procedure adopted by the Andhra Pradesh public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as the "service Commission") in preparing and publishing the list of candidates who ate entitled to appear for the main examination for Group I services is assailed as being illegal and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the constitution of India.

( 2 ) THE facts and circumstances that generated this group of writ petitions are these; The Service Commission invited applications in August, 1983 to fill up 138 posts in Group I Services by direct recruitment. Out of 47,337 applications were found valid after scrutiny.

( 3 ) THE recruitment is made by selection on the basis of a scheme of competetive examination. The scheme of examination comprises of a written as well as an oral test in the shape of an interview The written test is in two parts. The first part is preliminary examination of screening test. It comprises of paper-1, general studies and mental ability (objective type), and the second part comprises of the main examination in Papers II to VIII consisting of General english, Genral studies and Optional Subjects. The maximum marks for the first paper






Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top