Supreme Court: Rape Conviction Possible Without S.376 Charge if POCSO Case Fails on Age Proof  ||  SC: Mere Long Possession Can't Establish Adverse Possession; Hostile Intent is Required  ||  Supreme Court Finds Gaps in FSSAI’s Proposed Warning Labels for Foods High in Fat, Sugar and Salt  ||  Supreme Court Quashes ITS Officer's 'Deadwood' Retirement, Orders Rs. 15 Lakh Payment  ||  Uttarakhand HC: District Magistrate to Establish Public Helpline within 24 Hrs amid Water Pollution  ||  Allahabad HC: Custodial Violence and Molestation Are Crimes, Not Police Duty  ||  Gujarat High Court: Bombay Public Trust Registration is Covered by Section 43 of the Waqf Act  ||  J&K&L HC: Advocates not Above Law, No Immunity from Lawful Police Inquiry  ||  Gauhati HC: Talaq-e-Hasan Valid, Requires Registration under Assam Marriage Act  ||  NCLAT: NCLT President Empowered to Transfer Cases from One Bench to Another    

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