Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.29 seconds)
Documents citing Indira vs The State Of Kerala

Cincy Bibi vs State Of Kerala on 28 June, 1984

In fact as held by the Full Bench in Indira's case (supra) it is for the candidates to adduce evidence to show that they were subjected to such social disabilities. No such evidence is adduced. Therefore I am of the view that that as matters stand now, the report of KIRTADS cannot be treated as illegal. For that reason the consequent orders also cannot be challenged. Of course the petitioners do have a case that they were not given sufficient opportunity to adduce evidence.
Kerala High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sarojini V vs State Of Kerala on 15 May, 1978

The petitioner, who is now retired, claims the pay scale applicable to Headmistress with effect from 1.9.1987, from which date the petitioner was redesignated and appointed as Headmistress as per Exhibit P2 order dated 22.4.1988. The petitioner had then approached this Court with an Original Petition which was disposed of by Exhibit P3, directing the Government to consider the case of the petitioner and pass orders in accordance with the law declared by a Full Bench of this Court reported in Indira v. State of Kerala [1998 (2) ILR Kerala 771]. Despite Exhibit P3 judgment, the petitioner not having been granted the scale of pay, she was constrained to approach this Court with yet another Original Petition, which was again disposed of by Exhibit P6. Exhibit P6 judgment clearly declares that the petitioner is entitled to get the Headmaster's scale with effect from 1.9.1987. However, though it was recorded that the benefit has already been granted to the petitioner, it is WP(C).No.20616 of 2006-D
Kerala High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Keerthi P.Reman vs State Of Kerala on 18 May, 1976

11. A Full Bench of this Court in Indira v State of Kerala (2005(4) KLT 119) held that in order to get the benefit of Article 15(4), 16(4) or 16(4A) read with Articles 341 and 342 of the Constitution, the person born to an intercaste married couple has to establish that the person still uses the caste of Scheduled caste or Scheduled Tribe, as the case may be, and is subject to same disabilities, disadvantages, sufferings etc. of that caste or tribe. To establish the same, evidence has to be adduced. Therefore, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of permitting the petitioner to approach the Scrutiny Committee under Section 8 of the Kerala Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Act, 1976.
Kerala High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1