Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

of India. He placed reliance on the Apex Court judgment in Kailash Chand Sharma etc., etc., v. State of Rajasthan and Others (AIR 2002 SC 2877) where it has been held that residence by itself - be it within a State, region, district or a lesser area within a district, cannot be a ground to accord preferential treatment or reservation, save as provided in Article 16(3) and that it is not possible to compartmentalize the State into Districts with a view to offer employment to the residents of that district on a preferential basis. Learned Counsel also placed reliance on the Apex Court judgments in Mahabir Auto Stores and Others v. Indian Oil Corporation and Others (1990 (3) SCC 752), Reliance Energy Ltd., and another v. Maharashtra State Road Development Corpn. Ltd., and Others (2007 (8) SCC 1) and of this court in M/s. Zoom Developers Pvt. Ltd., v. State of Kerala and Others (2008 (4) KHC 934), which all lays down the requirement of fairness and transparency in state actions including invitation of tenders. On the other hand learned counsel appearing for the respondents contradicted the arguments of the petitioners and prayed, for the dismissal of the writ petitions.  WPC .Nos.21443/09& anor.