REGENT COMPUTRONICS PVT. LTD.

Shalini Chingtham Appellant

V/S

MANIPUR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION Respondents

Referred Judgements :-

COUNCIL OF CIVIL SERVICE UNION VS. MINISTER FOR CIVIL SERVICES [REFERRED TO]
BSNL VS. SURENDRA NATH PANDEY [REFERRED TO]
MANEKA GANDHI VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
ASHOK KUMAR YADAV STATE OF HARYANA D R CHAUDHARY MEMBER VS. STATE OF HARYANA:SUBHASH CHANDER SHARMA:ASHOK KUMAR YADAV [REFERRED TO]
KRISHAN YADAV VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
TATA CELLULAR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
NEW HORIZONS LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
BISWA RANJAN SAHOO VS. SUSHANTA KUMAR DINDA [REFERRED TO]
JOGINDER SINGH VS. ROSHAN LAL [REFERRED TO]
UNION OF INDIA VS. O CHAKRADHAR [REFERRED TO]
K SHEKAR VS. V INDIRAMMA [REFERRED TO]
ONKAR LAL BAJAJ VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION VS. GIRISH JAYANTI LAL VAGHELA [REFERRED TO]
SECRETARY STATE OF KARNATAKA VS. UMADEVI [REFERRED TO]
INDIAN AIRLINES LTD VS. PRABHA D KANAN [REFERRED TO]
SANJAY SINGH VS. U P PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION ALLAHABAD [REFERRED TO]
JITENDRA KUMAR VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
CHAIRMAN ALL INDIA RAILWAY REC BOARD VS. K SHYAM KUMAR [REFERRED TO]
TEJINDER SINGH @ KAKA VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
PRASHANT RAMESH CHAKKARWAR VS. UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION [REFERRED TO]
HITENDRA SINGH VS. P.D.KRISHI VIDYAPEETH [REFERRED TO]
JOGINDER PAL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
TANVI SARWAL VS. CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
SUNIL KUMAR AND ORS. VS. THE BIHAR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION AND ORS. [REFERRED TO]
GOHIL VISHVARAJ HANUBHAI VS. STATE OF GUJARAT & OTHERS [REFERRED TO]
UNION PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION VS. M SATHIYA PRIYA AND OTHERS [REFERRED TO]

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Smt. G. Pushpa, Advocate for the the appellants in WA No.19 of 2017 and for the petitioners in WP(C) No.606 of 2017; Shri R.K. Deepak, Advocate for the appellants in WA No.29 of 2017 and for the petitioners in WP(C) No.725 of 2017; Shri Vijay Hansaria, Senior Advoccate, Shri A. Bimol Singh, Senior Advocate, Shri S. Biswajit Meitei, Advocate, Shri Premjit, Advocate, Shri Ng. Kumar, Advocate, Shri T. Momo Singh, Advocate, Shri B.R. Sharma, Advocate and Shri Kh. Tarunkumar Singh, Advocate for the private respondents; Shri N. Ibotombi Singh, Senior Advoacate for the MPSC in all the cases; Shri Shyam Sharma, Government Advocate for the State respondents and Shri Y. Nirmolchand, Senior Advocate for the petitioner in WP(C) No.313 of 2018.

(2.) The above writ appeals and writ petitions have arisen out of a similar set of facts and therefore, the same are being disposed of by this common judgment and order. The subject matter in issue relates to the validity and correctness of the unfortunate and controversial examination conducted by the Manipur Public Service Commission (hereinafter referred to as "the MPSC ") for recruitment to various posts namely, MCS, MPS etc.

(3.) The MPSC issued a Notification dated 29-12-2015 inviting, through online, applications from amongst the eligible candidates for the Manipur Civil Services Combined Competitive Examination, 2015 (hereinafter referred to as "the Examination, 2015 ") for filling up 82 posts of different categories of service to be conducted under the provisions of the Manipur Civil Services Combined Competitive Examination Rules, 2010 (hereinafter referred to as "the Competitive Examination Rules, 2010 ") and the Preliminary Examination thereof was to be held on 28-02-2016. In response to the said Notification, many candidates submitted their applications.

Click here to view full judgment.

SHALINI CHINGTHAM Vs. MANIPUR PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION

Referred Judgements :-

JUDGEMENT

QUick Links

Get in Touch

Email

Contact Numbers

Address