https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175804 The Supreme Court upheld the Division Bench's judgment, validating appointments from the select list and allowing the filling of remaining vacancies. The appellant's challenge to appointments made after accepting procedural changes was dismissed, citing estoppel principles. The Court recognized the state's discretion in filling emergent vacancies within legal bounds and emphasized adherence to advertised selection procedures. The appeal was dismissed, highlighting the importance of equitable principles without compromising fundamental rights and the rule of law. en-us Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Feb 2018 17:38:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175804 The Supreme Court upheld the Division Bench's judgment, validating appointments from the select list and allowing the filling of remaining vacancies. The appellant's challenge to appointments made after accepting procedural changes was dismissed, citing estoppel principles. The Court recognized the state's discretion in filling emergent vacancies within legal bounds and emphasized adherence to advertised selection procedures. The appeal was dismissed, highlighting the importance of equitable principles without compromising fundamental rights and the rule of law. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 23 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=175804