Supreme Court Upholds the Constitutionality of Life Sentences Without Remission Until Natural Death  ||  Supreme Court: Service Benefits Can't be Refused Due to Missing ACRs Not Attributable to Employees  ||  Supreme Court: Courts May Grant Lesser Relief under Order VII Rule 7 CPC, But Not a Different Claim  ||  Supreme Court Dismisses Lokpal's Plea Against Delhi HC Order Quashing Probe into Defence Secretary  ||  SC Grants Bail to Two UAPA Accused, Citing 12-Year Incarceration and Violation of Article 21  ||  Madras High Court: Seeking Divorce over Wife's Accidental Hip Injury is Inhumane  ||  Kerala High Court Directs Stronger Audit and Financial Oversight in Guruvayur Devaswom  ||  Madras High Court Directs State and Judiciary to Expedite Rape and POCSO Trials  ||  Karnataka HC Upholds RTO's Power to Cancel Registration Secured by False Documents  ||  Karnataka HC: Bengaluru-Mysuru Corridor Could be Biggest Scam, Farmers Deprived of Land    

Raj HC: Having Different Age Criteria For Contractual and Regular Appointments is Unconstitutional - (13 Jan 2026)

SERVICE

Rajasthan High Court struck down Rule 6 of the 2022 Contractual Hiring Rules as unconstitutional, holding that prescribing 21 years for contractual recruitment, versus 18 years for regular recruitment under the 1965 Rules, violated Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution.

Tags : AGE CRITERIA   CONTRACTUAL   REGULAR APPOINTMENTS  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2026 - All Rights Reserved