Service Charges proved against the Respondent “were of neglect of duty” which resulted in pecuniary loss to the Railways High Court was therefore not justified in setting aside the order of compulsory retirement November 29, 2020 sclaw This content is restricted to site members. If you are an existing user, please log in. New users may register below.Existing Users Log InUsername or EmailPassword Remember Me Forgot password? Click here to resetNew User? Click here to register Related Posts Service Qualifications and Mode of Recruitment – Rules were issued by the High Court in exercise of the power under the Constitution of Jammu & Kashmir – These Rules had the approval of the Governor also – Therefore, the contention of the respondents that the office order issued by the Chief Justice was ultra vires, is completely untenable. January 19, 2021 sclaw Service Candidates who have ranked lower in the 2019 selection and were unable to obtain appointments cannot appropriate the vacancies of a subsequent year to themselves – To allow such a claim would be an egregious legal and constitutional error – Judgment of the High Court cannot be sustained – Appeal allowed. January 17, 2021 sclaw
