New add 72825 ki ******* SLP 1874 POINTS IN S.C Questions - TopicsExpress



          

New add 72825 ki ******* SLP 1874 POINTS IN S.C Questions of Law: A. Whether, the Hon’ble High Court was justified in directing the appointment beyond the purview of statutory Rules, 1981 and also beyond the notification of the NCTE dated 11.02.2011 (Clause 9B) issued as per the provisions of Section 23(1) of the Central Act No. 35 of 2009? B. Whether, the Hon’ble High Court can declare Rule-14(3) as per 15th Amendment, 2012 made in Rules, 1981 as Ultra-vires to Article 14 of the Constitution without considering and deciding the fate of the candidates who have already been appointed as per same Rule -14(3)? C. Whether, the Hon’ble High Court can direct the appointment as per notification dated 30.11.2011 without considering and deciding that the post of Trainee Teacher was not even inserted in Rules., 1981 till 30.11.2011? D. Whether, the Hon’ble High Court can direct the appointment on the post of Trainee Teacher on the score of TET examination, firstly which is only qualifying examination under the guidelines of NCTE and also under the statutory Rules; secondly the same is based on total malpractice and has got no sanctity as decided by the High Power Committee through its decision dated 10.04.2012 and also the consequential decision of the Cabinet dated 26.07.2012 and the Government Order dated 26.07.2012, which are still unchallenged in any of the writ petitions or Special Appeals? E. Weather, the Hon’ble High Court can direct the appointment of the candidates who have already received/returned back the due fees of their application forms and on the basis of the same, whose application forms have been destroyed and are not available with the Government/Department? F. Whether, the Hon’ble High Court is justified in directing the appointment without considering the candidature of the candidates who have appeared and passed UP TET, 2013? G. Whether, the Hon’ble High Court was justified in directing the appointment on the basis of scores of the TET Examination, the merit of which was already sub-judice before the Hon’ble High Court itself? GROUNDS: The petitioners are filing the instant Special Leave Petition on the following amongst other grounds: A. Because, the impugned judgment is illegal, bad and based on non-existing facts and law both. B. Because, the impugned judgment, an eligibility qualification for appointment on the post in question has been indirectly prescribed beyond the purview of the statutory said Rules, 1981 and 2011 and also the guidelines issued by the Central authority and the provisions of Central Act No. 35 of 2009 and as such, is without jurisdiction and in violation of Article 309 of The Constitution of India. C. Because, the Hon’ble High Court has committed illegality in direction the appointment beyond the purview of statutory Rules, 1981 and also beyond the notification of the NCTE dated 11.02.2011 (Clause 9B) issued as per the provisions of Section 23(1) of the Central Act No. 35 of 2009. D. Because, the Hon’ble High Court has committed grave illegality in declaring Rule-14(3) as per 15th Amendment, 2012 made is Rules, 1981 as ultra-virus to Article 14 of the Constitution without considering and deciding the fate of the candidates who have already been appointed as per same Rule-14(3). E. Because, the Hon’ble High Court could not legally direct the appointment as per notification dated 30.11.2011, without considering and deciding that the post of Trainee Teacher was not even inserted in Rules, 1981 till 30.11.2011. F. Because, the Hon’ble High Court manifestly erred in direct the appointment on the basis of score of TET examination, firstly which is only qualifying examination under the guidelines of NCTE and also under the statutory Rules; secondly the same is based on total malpractice and has got no sanctity as decided by the High Power Committee through its decision dated 10.04.2012 and also the consequential decision of the Cabinet dated 26.07.2012 and the Government Order dated 26.07.2012, which are still unchallenged in any of the writ petitions of Special Appeals. G. Because, the Hon
Posted on: Thu, 10 Jul 2014 00:14:22 +0000

Trending Topics



Recently Viewed Topics




© 2015