Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

- son : aoe yp a aa +4 : e ad 3 fy " shed L a iw i uy . aw * a ri8 os w be SS oo ga 3 5 i : - Ay et ot we eg bs ~ Sy e 5 A few we 6) : Co ae Sy MA < whee * t cea 2 Me se ce ne re © md 4 = ca 4 a & & gs) a wn r) g } is O aL as @ ' Prt © ky ea > = e . wv D C3 - bef ts <3) ey se ; oi eA ms G K " a } < ad O ' rol nm ; @ o a [hs Fas of o % ; a ro 2 Ly G 3 om] Union ef India € Ors. [ (2006) 8 scK S C iw 2 GB or So C £3 a4 ct ws ; Ged wed rd u a 3 Al C3 wp ~ w@ $+ oof ve 4} 2 sd as #5 Pe te a c : ; { 3 In fel Se oF es 4) 4 Os, 5 Ma 5 @ vs 4 Oho ey Oo * & ie ~ 4 tt a ry ~ ® eat 4 a x at oy 0) © ef by a " w cio + & hee eNee " 6 ed oA e f a oe CB * 5 ions 4 , "ag red e > orf & e i on aed moO gy vi} ( fb Bb wh ge © es ce bea oo ot oy oq "A a ; rh an x 2 a Gs nel 53 ay tes he cen rac re @ i « i ne) a . Fs we bs oe % th} a) uA fd Ly TS 5 a na } *" nt ie) fin poe, rh me ne i woe$ spd iy i : i * GB 4 : ~ AY, > we ha ce cn ms = a oy - Sed : oe mK or : 4 ne ~ oe os rent nt hep " "4 ay ee ' mS w i et hed ne " rd on + be : 563) A & "t ww ct es . a B ci og 5 % } ' gt «a nae C Bs ft he og s 4 4 "4 by v 4 a 7 We $e es " "rs of "ees ; we e fla 4 $3 ort £4 got co ® ' Ui war Oo Se 4 a 9 Aes. re) 2 a 4 © shed we a ta png 4 43 ; wrt : 4 n hs en DO eo as 1 m 4 a G 4d vs , +2 ho ed c ' Th it~ Bed if Ey 0 D 4 "3 © ® ont Ret o AA "4 at 4 Ve ny il oy a ot ui 44 Ao qs oO gee ' iG 2 fo "CS Lf ba Mf peek a "4 : n Bs ~ et ty OL, rs8] eS a @ 44 ~e4 C2 a a } * bee } ' 4 . emg % no ri et Oo BO th ne e ow 6 1 a; %& @ nl o3 es m4 i oi Bo wy 2 MH bead Cy 4d a . \ "rd "3 MB Bera « ch 53) vend if} iy : "7 oi ed Cc o o vs Rs © - wh bee ened is S o rind Q a 4 i i @ i Bo O u re we : o mot Shed at fh geod re) ' "4 » = ©. mf © S mt wD 4.4 ae a) Q @ i oO, aod bes o G G + . a ef bg & th io ne; e Ea by 43 3 wy rf t "5 us ~s ot 43 ts oped ay : : ie bo a * _ Ff i % " 0 yo 6 & 8 % a Pog a a : od ay ie G C mS 4 os a Mos c o o be SS wog § a 7 4 si 2 he 'ti eT . At xo ey ; Wal " : C by % #44 tt OY $3 i; Oo ' 4 © "i 3 G pot 5 : + hed oO a8 hd a oy o a hog gy * Aes nes a) by xp G4 Na. 6922016 Che applicant Submitte that he was wot Pressing the challenge to Ene answer key and Was restricting his application to the aspect r te be, Po bBo wee San, we hey "4 Soe ded i OF the CARLLenge to the application »f eeservations in. the matter of promotion. Fer Chis purpose, he has relied on the recent Judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Caurt in Jarnail Singh § Ors V. Lachhmi Narain Gupta ¢€ Ors. in SLP (Civil) No. 30621 of 2011 which considered the need te review the judgment fendered an M. Nagaraj (supra) by a Seven Judge Bench and denied such a requirement but Struck down a portion of the decisions that Were ruled in wemmza$ (wave) on ee need to carry out an exercise te Quantify backwardness. The Hon'ble Apex Ceurt maintained the need ta carry out the exercise for determining the other issues involved as Laid out in the rulings of the Hon'ble ADeX decided by the Hon'ble Apex Court ned & Haryana in Lachhmi Narain Gupta & Ors. Y. ri 4s ei and whey OA No. GU I0T8 L3218/2009 b.