Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 5 of 5 (0.17 seconds)
Prathapan vs Registrar, High Court Of Kerala on 11 April, 1984 cites

Shanta Alias Sant Lal vs State Of Haryana on 14 November, 1980

3. The thrust of the arguments on behalf of the petitioner is that the qualifications of Assistants Grade II having been prescribed by statutory rules framed under Article 229 of the Constitution and as under the rules it is enough that the applicant is a graduate irresepctive of the class he has secured at the graduation, it was beyond the power of the Registrar to add to the statutory rules by modifying the qualifications and insisting that the applicants must be either first class or second class graduates. Counsel reinforced his contention by reference to a number of decisions of the Supreme Court and High Courts holding that matters covered by statutory rules could not be altered by administrative instructions. That proposition as such was not contested by the Advocate-General and the Government Pleader who appeared for the respondents. We 25 do not therefore think it worthwhile to discuss the cases cited by counsel for the petitioner. In our view, Ext. PI involves no modification of the statutory rules or the qualifications prescribed by the statutory rules; it only lays down a process for screening the candidates by narrowing the field of choice. The point, in our view, is covered by two decisions, one of the Gujarat High Court, The Gujarat State Sales Tax Non Gazetted Employees' Association v. The State of Gujarat, 1977(1) SLR 452, and the other of the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Sant Lal v. State of Haryana, 1978(1) SLR 133. The former case concerned the selection of candidates for the post of Sales-Tax Inspector. Under the relevant rules candidates for direct recruitment to the post should, inter alia, possess a degree, with a proviso that preference would be given to a candidate who possesses the degree of B.Com. with Accountancy or Chartered Accountancy or possesses a qualification recognised to be equivalent to such examination by the Government of Gujarat. In pursuance of a notification issued by the Commissioner of Sales-Tax more than 15,000 candidates applied including respondents 2 to 4. Amongst the applicants more than 1,000 candidates held first class degrees in different Faculties and even amongst them about 580 were first class Commerce Graduates, about 101 were first class Arts Graduates and about 500 were first class Science Graduates. In view of the circumstances that more than 1000 candidates possessed first class Degrees in various Faculties, the Commissioner at the stage of screening, restricted the field of choice to first class Graduates only and decided not to call for interview second class or third class Graduates including Graduates having Commerce Degree with Accountancy as the subject. This selection was challenged in a writ petition. Upholding the selection a learned Judge observed:
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 45 - S M Ali - Full Document
1