Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 9 of 9 (0.24 seconds)Section 4 in The Banking Companies (Acquisition And Transfer Of Undertakings) Act, 1970 [Entire Act]
Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 2 in The Banking Companies (Acquisition And Transfer Of Undertakings) Act, 1970 [Entire Act]
State Of Kerala & Anr vs N. M. Thomas & Ors on 19 September, 1975
Article 16 of the Constitution of India permits a valid
classification (see State of Kerala vs. N.M.Thomas (1976) 2 SCC 310).
A valid classification is based on a just objective. The
result to be achieved by the just objective presupposes, the
choice of some for differential consideration/treatment, over
others. A classification to be valid must necessarily satisfy two
tests. Firstly, the distinguishing rationale has to be based on a
just objective. And secondly, the choice of differentiating one set
of persons from another, must have a reasonable nexus to the
objective sought to be achieved. Legalistically, the test for a
valid classification may be summarized as, a distinction based
on a classification founded on an intelligible differentia, which
has a rational relationship with the object sought to be achieved.
Whenever a cut-off date (as in the present controversy) is fixed
to categorise one set of pensioners for favourable consideration
over others, the twin test for valid classification (or valid
discrimination) must necessarily be satisfied.
Section 19 in The Banking Companies (Acquisition And Transfer Of Undertakings) Act, 1970 [Entire Act]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 12 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Section 3 in The Banking Companies (Acquisition And Transfer Of Undertakings) Act, 1970 [Entire Act]
1