Back
VIPIN SANGHI, R.C.KHULBE
Manish Chauhan – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Shri Vipin Sanghi, J.)
1. We have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the respondent no.1. Though respondent no.2 has filed its counter affidavit, but none appears for the said respondent when the matter is called out. We proceed to dispose of this petition at this stage. The petitioner seeks the following reliefs in this writ petition:-
Or
Issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of Certiorari, to quash and set aside the impugned advertisement dated 04.12.2021 issued by respondent no.2
Persons with disabilities are entitled to horizontal reservation cutting across all categories, and the application of horizontal reservations must comply with Rule 11(4) of the Rights of Persons wit....
The court reinforced the legal obligation to reserve posts for differently-abled persons as mandated by the Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act, 2016.
Rules of 2011 exempt any Government establishment from filling up vacancy by appointing persons suffering from benchmark disabilities.
A writ petition challenging a recruitment advertisement based on speculative apprehension regarding the future application of reservation policies is premature and not maintainable. Recruitment autho....
The court established that the reservation for Differently-abled Persons must be properly categorized and adhered to, as per legal precedents, ensuring fair treatment in the selection process.
Appointment on posts of Civil Judge and Judicial Magistrate under Civil Judge Cadre – Candidates who consciously took part in process of selection cannot be permitted to question advertisement or met....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
