Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
JYOTI SINGH
Prabhat Ranjan Deo – Appellant
Versus
Union Public Service Commission – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. maintainability of the petition based on jurisdiction. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments on the jurisdiction of the high court under the act. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. court's analysis of jurisdiction delineated by l. chandra kumar. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 4. high court's jurisdiction vs. central administrative tribunal's jurisdiction. (Para 15 , 16) |
| 5. reiteration of lost jurisdiction by the high court in service matters. (Para 17 , 18) |
| 6. clarification on the interpretation of related judgements. (Para 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. details on jurisdiction in service matters. (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 8. final ruling on the maintainability of the petition dismissed. (Para 25) |
| 9. conclusion regarding the next steps for the petitioner. (Para 26 , 27) |
JUDGMENT
C.M. APPL. 9374/2020 (Early Hearing) & 13286/2020 (Early Hearing)
Both the applications for early hearing of the Petition are allowed and the Petition is taken up for hearing.
W.P.(C) 3334/2019
1. The legal controversy that arises for consideration is the maintainability of the present petition before this Court. It would be exposit here to give a narrative of short and uncontroverted facts, only to decide the jurisdiction of
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
