Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 13 (0.49 seconds)
Documents citing Isha Tyagi vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 26 August, 2014

Santosh Kumar Upadhyay vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 14 January, 2016

In normal course of business this fact cannot be disputed that the terms and conditions of the advertisement cannot be permitted to be altered and the said terms and conditions have a mandatory characteristic. The situation, that is so emerging in the present case, is that a candidate cannot be asked to perform and discharge impossible task as here in spite of the fact that there has been a declaration by this Court clearly providing therein to extend the benefit of horizontal reservation of 2% for descendants of freedom fighters tracing their lineage through a son or through a daughter irrespective of the marital status of the daughter, in spite of said binding precedent at no point of time any attempt or endeavour was made by the State to implement the said judgment and bring the advertisement in question in line with the said judgment in question. The advertisement in question ought to have contained the reference of the judgment of this Court and as far as State is concerned, State Government is conceding to the situation that there has been a judgment of this Court and that they have proceeded to amend the definition in question. We have already proceeded to take view that the judgment of this Court is declaratory in nature and the amending act in question has to be accepted as clarificatory in nature, in such a situation and in this background for the fault of the State for not ensuring compliance of the judgment of this Court a candidate cannot be put to disadvantageous situation, inasmuch as, at the relevant point of time as definition in question has not been amended by means of amending act the authorities on the spot were not issuing the certificate to the incumbents who have lineage through married daughters of freedom fighters of being descendants of freedom fighters and, in such a situation, once act in question has been amended and, thereafter, certificate has been issued and based on the same petitioner has filled up the form of the mains examination under the category of Descendant of Freedom Fighter, then it may be true that there was a last cut of date but such a situation has to be dealt with in just and equitable manner.
Allahabad High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Kamini Singh vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others on 13 March, 2018

Reliance has been placed on Division Bench decision rendered in Isha Tyagi vs. State of U.P. and others4 in the matter pertaining to reservation of persons provided for descendants of freedom fighters. The conditions stipulated that descendants would include sons, unmarried daughters and son's son. The candidature of the petitioner therein, a grand daughter of a freedom fighter was held ineligible under the rule. The Court held that neither married daughter of the freedom fighter or her children would be disqualified from receiving the benefit of reservation which is otherwise available to them in their capacity as descendants of freedom fighter. The Court observed that "if the marital status of a son does not make any difference in law to his entitlement or to his eligibility as a descendant, equally in our view, the marital status of a daughter should in terms of constitutional values make no difference. The notion that a married daughter who ceases to be a part of the family of her parents upon her marriage must undergo a rethink in contemporary times."
Allahabad High Court Cites 10 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

State Of U.P. And Another vs Manish Kumar Gupta And Another on 4 August, 2017

The judgment of the High Court in the case of Isha Tyagi (supra) will have no application in the facts of this case inasmuch as the said judgment cannot be applied to reopen the selections which had already been completed prior to the date of the judgment. Specifically, in the circumstance, when the advertisement/ brochure published for the purpose did not extend, the benefit of horizontal reservation in favour of the dependents of freedom fighters to the sons and daughters of married daughters of the freedom fighters and the same was not challenged. A chaos would be created and closed chapter would be required to be reopened, if appointments are directed to be made now.
Allahabad High Court Cites 3 - Cited by 14 - Full Document

Court On Its Own Motion vs State Of H.P. & Others on 14 August, 2018

30. We find that another Division Bench of the Allahabad High Court in Writ Petition No.41279 of 2014, titled as Isha Tyagi v. State of U.P. & others, while taking a similar view, has observed that the "State Government has taken a policy decision to grant a horizontal reservation of 2% to the descendants of freedom fighters. While doing so, the State Government has qualified the condition of eligibility by stipulating that a son or a daughter would be entitled to the benefit of the reservation. However, it has been stated in the relevant condition that the law department had opined that this benefit can be extended only to an unmarried daughter of a freedom fighter. Consequently, whereas the son's son would be eligible to apply for admission, the children of a daughter stand excluded. Exclusion of a granddaughter is plainly an act of hostile discrimination which is violative of the fundamental right guaranteed ::: Downloaded on - 16/08/2018 22:59:12 :::HCHP ...20...
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 31 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Smt. Vimla Srivastava vs State Of U.P. And Another on 4 December, 2015

In the judgment of this Court in Isha Tyagi vs. State of U.P.2, a Division Bench considered the legality of a condition which was imposed by the State Government while providing horizontal reservation to descendants of freedom fighters. The condition which was imposed by the State excluded the children of the daughter of a freedom fighter from seeking admission to medical colleges in the State under an affirmative action programme. Holding this to be unconstitutional, the Division Bench held as follows:
Allahabad High Court Cites 21 - Cited by 219 - Y Varma - Full Document

Smt. Madhavi Mishra vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 16 March, 2023

In the judgment of this Court in Isha Tyagi vs. State of U.P.2, a Division Bench considered the legality of a condition which was imposed by the State Government while providing horizontal reservation to descendants of freedom fighters. The condition which was imposed by the State excluded the children of the daughter of a freedom fighter from seeking admission to medical colleges in the State under an affirmative action programme. Holding this to be unconstitutional, the Division Bench held as follows:
Allahabad High Court Cites 13 - Cited by 0 - A Mathur - Full Document

Anmol Deep vs State Of U P And 3 Others on 30 August, 2018

In Isha Tyagi Vs. State of U.P. and others 2014 (6) AWC 6138 His Lordship Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, the then Chief Justice of Allahabad High Court (as he then was) in writing the opinion for the division bench considered the matter of horizontal reservation for descendants of freedom fighters in Medical Colleges of the State and held that the State cannot discriminate on the basis of gender by allowing dependants of the sons of the freedom fighters the benefit of reservation and not to the sons of a married daughter.
Allahabad High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Chanchal Pachauri vs State Of U.P. And Another on 30 September, 2020

3. The facts of the case can be drawn in a narrow compass like this that the petitioner and her elder sister Sonam Upadhyay were only married daughters survived by late Munna Lal Sharma who died on 20.12.2018 while in active service working as Tubewell Operator with Tubewell IVth Division, Hathra in the Irrigation Department. Since the wife of late Munna Lal Sharma had pre deceased her husband and the elder daughter Sonam Upadhyay had given her no objection in favour of the present petitioner to apply for appointment on compassionate ground and since the husband of the present petitioner was unemployed, the petitioner applied for compassionate appointment vide application dated 06.03.2019. The petitioner is qualified being Post Graduate and stated to have agreed for any job, if offered, as compassionate appointment. However, the claim of the petitioner came to be rejected vide order dated 20.04.2019 on the ground that there was no rule for granting appointment to a married daughter. Since this order passed by the authority concerned was in the teeth of judgment of this Court in Isha Tyagi v. State of U.P. & Ors [Writ - C No. 41279 of 2014] now followed in the case of Smt. Vimla Srivastava v. State of U.P. reported in 2016 (1) All.LJ 678, the petitioner challenged the order before this Court vide Writ - A No. 8965 of 2019. As the petitioner's claim was rejected on the ground that she was a married daughter and the controversy regarding compassionate appointment of a married daughter had remained no more res integra, this Court set aside the order of respondent authority dated 20.04.2019 and remitted the matter for decision afresh.
Allahabad High Court Cites 9 - Cited by 0 - A Kumar - Full Document
1   2 Next