SC: Under RTE Act, States Cannot Justify Low Teacher Pay by Citing Centre’s Failure to Release Funds  ||  Supreme Court: While a Child’s Welfare is Paramount, It is Not the Sole Factor in Custody Disputes  ||  Supreme Court: High Court Cannot Reject a Plaint While Exercising Jurisdiction under Article 227  ||  SC: Merely Leasing an Apartment Does Not Bar a Flat Buyer’s Consumer Complaint Against the Builder  ||  Delhi HC: Unproven Adultery Allegations Cannot be Used to Deny Interim Maintenance under the DV Act  ||  Bombay HC: Storing Items in a Fridge isn’t Manufacturing and Doesn’t Make Premises a Factory  ||  Kerala HC: Disability Pension is Not Payable if the Condition is Unrelated to Military Service  ||  Supreme Court: Award Valid Even If Passed After Mandate Expiry When Court Extends Time  ||  Jharkhand HC: Regular Bail Plea During Interim Bail is Not Maintainable under Section 483 BNSS  ||  Cal HC: Theft Claims and Public Humiliation Alone Don’t Amount To Abetment of Suicide U/S 306 IPC    

Madras HC Disposes of Petition Assailing Validity of Amendment Law Officer Appointment Rules - (17 Jun 2021)

SERVICE

Madras High Court has disposed of a petition filed assailing the validity of an amendment that was made to the rules under the Law Officers of High Court of Madras and its Bench at Madurai (Appointment) Rules, 2017 which govern the appointment of government advocates. The Court has upheld the validity of sub-clause (k) in Rule 4(i), which stipulates the eligibility for being appointed as Government Advocates.

Tags : MADRAS HIGH COURT   VALIDITY OF AMENDMENT LAW OFFICER APPOINTMENT RULES  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved