VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA
Sunil – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan through Principal Secretary – Respondent
1. Consented by the counsel for the parties, the batch of writ applications has been taken up together, at this stage, for final disposal by this common order, in view of the identicalness of questions of facts and law raised.
2. Shorn off unnecessary details, the essential skeletal material facts are: that the State-respondents vide advertisement dated 13th April, 2018, invited applications from eligible candidates for appointment to the post of Safai Karamchari withdrawing the earlier advertisement dated 25th May, 2012 and 31st May, 2012, to the extent of appointments not made, even after completion of selection process. However, the candidature of the participating candidates of recruitment of 2012, was to be considered in the new selection process initiated vide advertisement dated 13th April, 2018, allowing relaxation of age. The above noted writ applications have been instituted assailing the recruitment process initiated vide advertisement dated 13th April, 2018, on various grounds. In view of the pleadings of the parties; the controversy projected in the writ a
Dr. Pradeep Kumar Jain Vs. Union of India
Girjesh Shrivastava & Ors. Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. (2010) 10 SCC 707
Miss Neelima Shangla v. State of Haryana and Ors. (1986) 3 SCR 785
Shankarsan Dash Vs. Union of India
State of Haryana and Ors. Vs. Piara Singh and Ors. (1992) 4 SCC 118
State of Haryana Vs. Subash Chander Marwaha and Ors. (1974) 3 SCC 220
State of Haryana v. Subhash Chander Marwaha and Ors. (1973) 2 LLJ 266 (SC)
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.