In this writ petition, the petitioner challenged his denial of entry to an examination centre. The Court held that disputed facts cannot be ascertained in a writ proceeding and dismissed the petition.
The petition was dismissed; the stay application was disposed of.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~
versus
STAFF SELECTION COMMISSION THROUGH: ITS CHAIRMAN & ORS ..... Respondents Through: Mr G.D. Sharma, Advocate for R-1 & 3. Mr Yogesh Dutt Sharma, Advocate for R-2.
CORAM:
JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH
S. MURALIDHAR, J.
TALWANT SINGH, J.
NOVEMBER 14, 2019 rd
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the High Court can inquire into disputed questions of fact in a writ petition regarding denial of entry to an examination centre.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Budh Sagar
Staff Selection Commission
S. Muralidhar
Talwant Singh
As recorded by the court registry
A petition under Article 226 of the Constitution asking a High Court to issue a writ against the State or a public authority in a civil matter.
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
