RAVI RANJAN, SUJIT NARAYAN PRASAD
Surbhi Saxena D/o Shri Arvind Kumar Saxena – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
ORDER :
1. With consent of the parties, hearing of the matter has been done through video conferencing and there is no complaint whatsoever regarding audio and visual quality.
I.A. No. 2677 of 2021
2. The instant Interlocutory Application has been filed for amendment in the prayer portion of the writ petition by making addition in the last portion of prayer no. 1(a) to the effect “in the vacant seats that have arisen on account of non-joining of the selected candidates.”
3. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
4. Learned counsel for the applicant-writ petitioner has submitted that prayer of the petitioner stands on the sole footing that final appointment has not been made on all the vacancies that were notified in the advertisement, as such case of the petitioner may be considered for appointment on the said post, but inadvertently the petitioner missed to pray for her recommendation on these vacant seats. It has further been submitted that the amendment sought for is necessary for proper adjudication of the matter. Hence, prayer has been made to allow the amendment petition.
5. Learned counsel for the respondents did not raise serious objection to such prayer.
6. Having heard learned c
Bimlesh Tanwar vs. State of Haryana and Others
H.S. Sidhu vs. Devendra Bapna and Others
Nottinghamshire County Council vs. Secretary of State for the Environment
R. vs. Secretary of State for the Home Department, Ex. Brind
Syed T.A. Naqshbandi and Others vs. State of J&K and Others
Shankaran Das vs. Union of India
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.