Public Employment

Supreme Court quashes appointments made under flawed 2010 advertisement: Amrit Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand (2025) INSC 176 (February 10, 2025)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Fundamental Rights, Judges, Pankaj Mithal, Public Employment, Sandeep Mehta, Service Law

Introduction Date of the Judgment: February 10, 2025 Citation: 2025 INSC 176 Judges: Pankaj Mithal, J., Sandeep Mehta, J. Was the recruitment process for Class IV employees in Palamu, Jharkhand, fair and transparent? The Supreme Court of India recently examined this question in a case involving appointments made based on an advertisement from 2010. The […]

Supreme Court quashes appointments made under flawed 2010 advertisement: Amrit Yadav vs. State of Jharkhand (2025) INSC 176 (February 10, 2025) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Scheduled Caste Certificate to Converted Christian: C. Selvarani vs. The Special Secretary (2024)

/ Constitution (Pondicherry) Scheduled Castes Order, 1964, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 341, Fraudulent Certificates, Public Employment, Reservation, Scheduled Castes, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Scheduled Caste Certificate to Converted Christian: C. Selvarani vs. The Special Secretary (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a person who was born Christian, but claims to have reconverted to Hinduism, is eligible for a Scheduled Caste certificate. CASE TYPE: Constitutional Law, Caste Certificate, Service Law Case Name: C. Selvarani vs. The

Supreme Court Upholds Denial of Scheduled Caste Certificate to Converted Christian: C. Selvarani vs. The Special Secretary (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Rules of the Game in Public Employment: Tej Prakash Pathak vs. Rajasthan High Court (2024)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Fundamental Rights, Public Employment, Recruitment Rules, Service Law, Service Law with Article 309

Supreme Court Clarifies Rules of the Game in Public Employment: Tej Prakash Pathak vs. Rajasthan High Court (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Can the selection procedure for public employment be changed after the recruitment process has begun? CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Tej Prakash Pathak & Ors. vs. Rajasthan High Court & Ors. [Judgment Date]: November

Supreme Court Clarifies Rules of the Game in Public Employment: Tej Prakash Pathak vs. Rajasthan High Court (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Reinstates Technical Grade-II Employees: Mukul Kumar Tyagi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Eligibility Criteria, Public Employment, Recruitment Rules, Service Law

Supreme Court Reinstates Technical Grade-II Employees: Mukul Kumar Tyagi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether candidates possessing a Computer Concepts Certificate (CCC) at the time of interview, but not on the last date of application, are eligible for appointment. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Mukul Kumar Tyagi vs. The State of

Supreme Court Reinstates Technical Grade-II Employees: Mukul Kumar Tyagi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Appointment of Candidate Due to State’s Error in Haryana Staff Selection Commission vs. Subhash Chand (2024)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 226, Fundamental Rights, High Court Orders, High Court Orders with Implementation, Judicial Review, Public Employment, Reservation Policy, Service Law

Supreme Court Upholds Appointment of Candidate Due to State’s Error in Haryana Staff Selection Commission vs. Subhash Chand (2024) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a candidate should be penalized for the State’s failure to properly implement reservation policies. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Haryana Staff Selection Commission vs. Subhash Chand & Ors. [Judgment Date]: 31 January

Supreme Court Upholds Appointment of Candidate Due to State’s Error in Haryana Staff Selection Commission vs. Subhash Chand (2024) Read Post »

Supreme Court Quashes Arbitrary Selection Process for Physical Training Instructors: Nutan Kumari vs. B.R.A. Bihar University (2023)

/ Arbitrary Selection, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Fundamental Rights, Public Employment, Selection Process, Service Law

Supreme Court Quashes Arbitrary Selection Process for Physical Training Instructors: Nutan Kumari vs. B.R.A. Bihar University (2023) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a selection process for public employment can be deemed arbitrary and illegal due to inconsistent marking and undisclosed criteria. CASE TYPE: Service Law – Public Employment Case Name: Nutan Kumari vs. B.R.A. Bihar University and

Supreme Court Quashes Arbitrary Selection Process for Physical Training Instructors: Nutan Kumari vs. B.R.A. Bihar University (2023) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of compromise orders in service matters: R. Muthukumar & Ors. vs. TANGEDCO & Ors. (2022)

/ Bela M. Trivedi, Compromise Orders, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Judges, Parity in Service Matters, Public Employment, S. Ravindra Bhat, Service Law, Uday Umesh Lalit

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of compromise orders in service matters: R. Muthukumar & Ors. vs. TANGEDCO & Ors. (2022) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether a compromise order passed by a court can be the basis for extending similar benefits to non-parties. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: R. Muthukumar & Ors. vs. The Chairman and Managing

Supreme Court clarifies the scope of compromise orders in service matters: R. Muthukumar & Ors. vs. TANGEDCO & Ors. (2022) Read Post »

Supreme Court clarifies “suitable post” for compassionate appointment: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Premlata (2021)

/ A. S. Bopanna, Compassionate Appointment, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Dying-in-Harness Rules, Government Employee, Judges, M. R. Shah, Public Employment, Service Law, Uttar Pradesh Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974, Uttar Pradesh Dying-in-Harness Rules, 1974 with Rule 5

Supreme Court Clarifies Compassionate Appointment Rules: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Premlata (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Interpretation of “suitable post” in compassionate appointment rules. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: The State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors. vs. Premlata [Judgment Date]: October 5, 2021 Date of the Judgment: October 5, 2021 Citation: Civil Appeal No. 6003

Supreme Court clarifies “suitable post” for compassionate appointment: State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Premlata (2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of LARSGESS Scheme: Manjit & Ors vs. Union of India (29 January 2021)

/ Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 16, Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Indira Banerjee, Judges, Public Employment, Sanjiv Khanna, Service Law, Service Law with LARSGESS Scheme

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of LARSGESS Scheme: Manjit & Ors vs. Union of India (2021) LEGAL ISSUE: Whether the termination of the LARSGESS Scheme by the Union of India was valid and whether the petitioners are entitled to appointment under the scheme. CASE TYPE: Service Law, Writ Petition Case Name: Manjit and Ors vs. Union

Supreme Court Upholds Termination of LARSGESS Scheme: Manjit & Ors vs. Union of India (29 January 2021) Read Post »

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Appointments Based on Incorrect Category: Amol vs. State of Maharashtra (2017)

/ Appointment, Judges, Kurian Joseph, Public Employment, R. Banumathi, Reservation, Service Law

Date of the Judgment: November 7, 2017 Citation: Not Available Judges: Justice Kurian Joseph and Justice R. Banumathi Can an appointment be valid if it was offered under a wrong category? The Supreme Court of India addressed this question in a recent case concerning appointments to the post of Krishi Sevak in Maharashtra. The court

Supreme Court Upholds Rejection of Appointments Based on Incorrect Category: Amol vs. State of Maharashtra (2017) Read Post »

Supreme Court Clarifies Rules on False Caste Certificates in Public Employment: FCI vs. Jagdish Balaram Bahira (2017)

/ Appointments, Constitutional Law, Constitutional Law with Article 14, Constitutional Law with Article 142, D.Y. Chandrachud, Fundamental Rights, Jagdish Singh Khehar, Judges, Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001, Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001 with Section 10, Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001 with Section 11, Maharashtra Act XXIII of 2001 with Section 7, N.V. Ramana, Public Employment, Reservations, Service Law

LEGAL ISSUE: Consequences of securing public employment with a false caste certificate. CASE TYPE: Service Law Case Name: Chairman and Managing Director, FCI & Ors. vs. Jagdish Balaram Bahira & Ors. Judgment Date: 6 July 2017 Date of the Judgment: 6 July 2017 Citation: (2017) INSC 628 Judges: Jagdish Singh Khehar, CJI, N.V. Ramana, J,

Supreme Court Clarifies Rules on False Caste Certificates in Public Employment: FCI vs. Jagdish Balaram Bahira (2017) Read Post »

Scroll to Top