
A Critique of the Amal Satpathi Judgment: Supreme, but not Infallible
by Shubham Priyadarshi*
by Shubham Priyadarshi*
The Governor’s failure to consult the Commission as envisaged in Rule 10 of Sikkim Government Servants’ (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1985, while passing the order modifying the penalty, alone would not change the nature of the case.
Calcutta High Court emphasised on the importance of adhering to the standards set by the Supreme Court in selecting competent individuals for the Public Service Commission positions.
The instant matter involved a dispute over the preparation of a merit list for government posts in West Bengal, with a focus on the treatment of candidates from reserved categories who had availed age and fee relaxations.
Allahabad High Court said that the State authorities sat over the matter in a highly arbitrary and illegal manner. The Commission has also, in a highly arbitrary and illegal manner, proceeded with the selection without even verifying the qualifications of the participants. This has vitiated the entire selection process.
by Siddharth R. Gupta† and Pushp Sharma††
Cite as: 2023 SCC OnLine Blog Exp 9
Uttaranchal High Court: The Division Bench of Sanjaya Kumar Mishra, CJ. and Ramesh Chandra Khulbe, J. allowed a petition which was filed
Supreme Court: In a breather to the candidates challenging the RAS Pre-examination result, the bench of KM Joseph and Hrishikesh Roy, JJ
Rajasthan High Court: A Division Bench of Akil Kureshi CJ and Sudesh Bansal J. stayed the impugned judgment and left it open
Patna High Court: The Division Bench of Amreshwar Pratap Sahi, CJ and Anjana Mishra, J. rejected an appeal filed by a candidate
Jammu and Kashmir High Court: A Single Judge Bench of Sanjeev Kumar, J., allowed a writ petition filed against the order of
Karnataka High Court: In the instant case wherein the issue arose regarding the power of the Governor to suspend a member of