BIREN VAISHNAV
Jatinkumar Kishorkumar Bhatt – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Rule, returnable forthwith. Mr. Vinay Bairagra, learned AGP and Ms. Shruti Pathak, learned Assistant Government Pleaders waive service of notice of Rule for the respondent - State.
2. With the consent of the learned advocates appearing for the respective parties, these petitions are taken up for its final disposal.
3. In all these petitions, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have prayed for a direction that the action of the PSI Recruitment Board of including reserved category candidates in the list of general category candidates in the preliminary merit list of the preliminary exams, for the purpose of appearing in the main examination for the post of PSI, Class III is unlawful and in violation of Article 14, 15, 16 and 21 of the Constitution of India. The petitioners have further prayed that a fresh merit list of candidates for appearing in the main examination be prepared by calling upon three times the candidates of each category i.e. reserv
Ravindra Singh v. State of Chhattisgardh and others reported in 2014 (2) SCC 232
Bihari Lal Rada v. Anil Jain (Tinu) and others reported in 2009 (4) SCC 1
Saurav Yadav and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and others reported in 2021 (4) SCC 542
R.K. Sabharwal v. State of Punjab (1995) 2 SCC 745
Union of India and others v. Virpal Singh Chauhan and others (1995) 6 SCC 684
Chhatar Singh and others v. State of Rajasthan and others reported in (1996) 11 SCC 742
Alpesh Surendrasinh Rathod v. State of Gujarat reported in 2021 (2) GLR 881
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.