Advertisement did not authorize authorities to apply weightage to exam scores that could disadvantage some candidates hence, Petitioners selected and appointment orders issued to them in terms of advertisement as they have secured total marks more than Respondents.
Petitioner is deemed to hold sufficient documentation proving her residency in village Padoshi hence, Respondents authorities shall appoint Petitioner on subject matter post of Anganwadi Madatnis.
Cancellation of admission was deemed lawful and not arbitrary, affirming that right to education does not permit repeated claims under welfare quota after prior benefits have been received.
Compensation of Rs. 46,06,000 with 7% annual interest from claim application date was awarded to deceaseds mother, with specific provisions regarding interest adjustments excluded from reconsideration.
Granting and subsequently cancelling permission for an event on multiple occasions in March 2026 demonstrates authorities' illegal and mala fide actions, violating fundamental rights of attendees.
Petitioners failed to establish significant case for an unconditional stay of awards execution, as they have not shown substantial loss nor provided adequate security for awards performance therefore, District Judges decision to conditionally stay awards execution was deemed appropriate.
AHAD Board does not meet criteria to be considered a necessary or proper party under CPC hence, Trial Courts order was not erroneous and there is no basis for this Court to intervene under Article 227 of Constitution.
Writ petition was dismissed for lack of merit and Review Petition did not reveal any significant errors warranting interference.
Respondents did not demonstrate that Petitioners were aware of this panchnama and Revisional Authority merely restated Tahsildars conclusions without addressing specific issues, leading to rejection of Revision Application being similarly unsustainable.
Transfer of land by Collector, Pune, for a public housing project aimed at economically weaker sections is deemed lawful and serves a public purpose, with no identified illegality in Collectors actions.
Writ petition was dismissed for lack of merit and Review Petition did not reveal any significant errors warranting interference.
Decree for possession is unsustainable, negating need for damages or inquiries into mesne profits.
Plaintiff is entitled to seek relief related to possession, common amenities and damages and suit raises triable issues that cannot be dismissed prematurely.
Respondent-Department failed to satisfy specific condition, resulting in illegal seizure of INR 1 crore from Petitioner, who has proven ownership of cash and it, also did not provide adequate reasoning or documentation to justify seizure, making it unauthorized under CGST Act.
Controller did not conduct technical analysis of competing patents, merely stating that D1 was not an appropriate document as defined by Section 25(2)(c) without justification hence, Patent Application No. 2553/MUM/2010) is remanded back for fresh consideration before different Controller.
Impugned order is quashed, accepting Petitioners Settlement Application for tax period 2008-09 without adjusting refund of Rs. 33,29,000/- from 2007-08 and Respondents must refund Rs. 33,29,000/- with interest per MVAT Act to Petitioners account within two weeks of this orders upload.
Completion of an apprenticeship does not automatically lead to preferential treatment in recruitment, as all candidates must meet employers selection criteria for permanent positions.
Plaintiff is entitled to interim relief due to significant financial losses and that Defendant No.1s counterclaim lacks substance and credibility, with no basis for damages attributed to Plaintiffs actions.
Petitioner was not entitled to quash communication dated 21.09.2015, as necessary notice under Section 127 was satisfied and adequate public amenities were maintained in revised development plan effective from 10.02.2019.
Appellate Courts findings regarding nuisance, along with other grounds relating to property law, are deemed perverse and represent a misreading of evidence, risking miscarriage of justice.
Tap the button below to open the PDF in your device's default viewer