Patna High Court directs BTSC to consider a medical graduate’s experience marks, ruling that candidates cannot be penalized for delays or errors by government officials, ensuring fairness and transparency in recruitment under Advertisement No. 19 of 2025.
The Supreme Court has issued notice to the Centre and SSC on a plea seeking reforms to ensure fairness, transparency, and accountability in recruitment exams. The petition highlights irregularities after SSC entrusted exams to “Eduquity” instead of TCS.
Today, On 28th July, The Supreme Court has dismissed a plea challenging the J&K Civil Judge notification that didn’t include the 3-year practice rule, clarifying that its earlier judgment will apply only prospectively with “no impact on old recruitment notices.”
Today, On 10th July, The Madhya Pradesh High Court reserved its verdict on NTA’s appeal against a re-test for NEET-UG 2025 candidates affected by power failure; the bench remarked, “Only one plane crashed, but thousands fly every day.”
The Supreme Court Collegium held interviews with 54 candidates to fill 371 vacant High Court judge posts. The process gained attention due to recent controversies in the judiciary.
Today, On 16th June, A review petition has been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the verdict on the 3-year practice rule for judicial exams, stating that “immediate enforcement violates Article 14 & 16” and causes unfair retrospective exclusion.
Today, On 20th May, the Supreme Court mandated the rule that candidates must have at least three years of advocate practice to qualify for entry-level judicial service positions.
The Bihar Civil Court has released the Clerk Prelims Result 2025 with 42,397 candidates qualifying. Check your roll number and result now on the official website.
The Supreme Court collegium, led by Chief Justice Sanjiv Khanna, held an unprecedented meeting in Visakhapatnam to assess candidates for judgeship from Andhra Pradesh and Telangana High Courts. This marks a significant departure from traditional processes, allowing personal interaction to evaluate candidates’ suitability, while also addressing diversity concerns regarding family connections in judicial appointments.
A group of UPSC aspirants challenged the age limit cut-off of August 1 in letters to the Chief Justice of India (CJI). They argue that the cut-off date is unfair, as it discriminates against candidates born in the same year but just a few months or days apart. The aspirants claim this policy denies them equal opportunities. They have urged the CJI to address this issue in the interest of fairness.
