Bank Can Adjust OTS Deposit on Borrower Default, No Cheating u/s 420 IPC: Delhi High Court
02 Mar 2026
Divij Kumar Quits CMS INDUSLAW for Independent Practice
03 Mar 2026
Global Lawyers Debate AI Liability in Autonomous Vehicles
03 Mar 2026
CCPA Fines Startup ₹8 Lakh for False Child Growth Claims
05 Mar 2026
Madras High Court Scoffs at Police Custody Injury Claim
05 Mar 2026
India's Criminal Investigations Face Systemic Conviction Crisis
05 Mar 2026
Kerala HC Slams TDB Financial Discipline in Ayyappa Conclave, Orders Auditor Report on Past Anomalies: High Court of Kerala
06 Mar 2026
ST Members Can Invoke Section 13B HMA If Hinduised By Customs: Chhattisgarh High Court
06 Mar 2026
Lease Cancellation Valid Even by 'In-Charge' Mining Officer Under OMMC Rules: Orissa High Court
06 Mar 2026
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
MS.JUSTICE R. POORNIMA, J
K.Raja – Appellant
Versus
State of Tamil Nadu – Respondent
Headnote: Read headnote
ORDER
This Writ Petition is filed by the petitioner with a prayer to issue a Writ of Certiorarified Mandamus, calling for the records pertaining to the order passed by the 1st respondent in his proceedings in Letter (1D) No.77/M1/2008 dated 15.02.2011 and quash the same and direct the respondents to promote the petitioners as Physical Director Grade II from the date on which their juniors were given promotion with all consequential benefits.
2. The case of the petitioners in brief are as follows :
a) The petitioners and others are working as Physical Education Teachers, claiming promotion to the post of Physical Director Grade II with seniority and other benefits. Since the matter is to be adjudicated, points to be decided, cause of action and relief are all the same. The petitioners joined together and filed a single writ petition and brought to pass a common order.
b) The petitioner passed 10th standard in the year 1987, 12th standard in the year 1989 and passed B.A. Economics in the year 1994 and M.P.Ed., in the year 1996. The 2nd pet
Denial of promotion based on accepted qualifications is arbitrary and violates principles of natural justice.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the obligation to create promotional avenues for government servants and the constitutional obligation to do so under Articles 14 and 16 of the ....
Promotion is a fundamental aspect of service that must be equitably provided to all eligible employees, adhering to constitutional mandates of fairness and equality.
The court upheld the rejection of the petitioner's candidature as her MA (P.Ed) was not equivalent to the required M.P.Ed, confirming the necessity of adhering to specified qualifications in recruitm....
Discrimination against qualified teachers in promotion constitutes a violation of constitutional rights to equality.
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.