SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2005 Supreme(Ori) 616

2005 (Supp.) OLR (NOC) — 1118
I. M. QUDDUSI AND N. PRUSTY, JJ.
Mrs. Madhumita Das and another...Petitioners
Versus
State of Orissa and others...Opp. Parties
W. P. (C) No. 2780 of 2004
(Date of Judgment : 09.09.2005)

Headnote:CONSTITUTION OF INDIA, 1950 - Arts. 14, 16 - Orissa Judicial Service (Special Scheme) Rules, 2001 - Recruitment of Ad hoc Addl. District Judges - Norms published in the advertisement for notice of all - Whether it could be changed at a later stage without notice to any of the candidates and general public and without issuing any corrigendum of the advertisement in question - Once an advertisement was issued to fill up a post in any office under the State, it is the duty of the recruiting authority to give necessary information to all in a precise and clear manner - Non-providing of knowledge about such change of norms amounted to deprivation of the prospective candidates from participating in the process of selection and was thus violative of Article 16 of the Constitution.

Madhumita Das vs State of Orissa - 2005 Supreme(Ori) 616
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top