IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI, ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, CJ, MICHAEL ZOTHANKHUMA
State of Assam – Appellant
Versus
Dipankar Gogoi S/o Durnagogoi – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. formation and details of tet and eligibility criteria. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. arguments against tet criteria and grace marks. (Para 8 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 19) |
| 3. court's rationality on tet criteria and grace marks. (Para 28 , 52 , 68) |
| 4. final order and directive for clarity on eligibility. (Para 69 , 70) |
JUDGMENT :
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, CJ.
1. We have heard Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned Advocate for the appellants in Writ Appeal No.186/2022; Mr. K.N. Choudhury, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. D.J. Das, learned Advocate for the appellants in Writ Appeal No.215/2022; Mr. K.K. Mahanta, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. K.M. Mahanta, learned Advocate for the appellants in Writ Appeal No.222/2022 and Dr. G.J. Sharma, learned Advocate for the appellants in Writ Appeal No.283/2022. Also heard Mr. R. Mazumdar, learned Standing Counsel, Education (Secondary) Department; Mr. I. Chowdhury, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. T. Das, learned Advocate for the respondent Nos.817 to 821 in Writ Appeal No.186/2022 and Mr. S. Borthakur, leaned Advocate for the respondent Nos.793 to 816 in Writ Appeal No.186/2022.
2. All the appeals have been heard together and are being disp
Mukul Saikia & Ors. Vs. State of Assam & Ors.
Tej Prakash Pathak & Ors. Vs. Rajasthan High Court & Ors.
Tej Prakash Pathak & Ors. Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
State of Haryana Vs. Subash Chander Marwaha & Ors.
Maharashtra State Board of Secondary & Higher Education Vs. Amit & Anr.
Orissa Public Service Commission & Anr. Vs. Rupashree Chowdhary & Anr.
Taniya Malik Vs. Registrar General of the High Court of Delhi
K. Manjusree Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr.
Himani Malhotra Vs. High Court of Delhi
Bedanga Talukdar Vs. Saifudaullah Khan & Ors.
Registrar, Rejiv Gandhi University of Health Sciences, Bangalore Vs. G. Hemlatha & Ors.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the binding effect of the settlement between the parties, the waiver of the right to seek re-employment by the workmen, and the entitlement of the ....
A lockout is justified if it is declared in response to an illegal strike or a strike that is in breach of a settlement or award.
The combination of eyewitness testimonies, recovery of the weapon used, and forensic examination results can establish guilt in criminal cases, even based on circumstantial evidence.
The conviction of an accused person under Section 27(3) of the Arms Act is not permissible in law if the accused is also charged with committing murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.
The court can enhance compensation based on the deceased's income and family dependency, and adjust the multiplier used by the Tribunal if found unjustified.
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.