Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (1.20 seconds)
Narendra Kumar Vijay S/O Shri Banwari ... vs State Of Rajasthan Through Its ... on 13 July, 2018 cites

Rajesh Kumar Daria vs Rajasthan Public Service Commission & ... on 18 July, 2007

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA Order 13/07/2018 Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the very outset, submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ application is no more res-integra in view of the adjudication made by the Apex Court of the land in the case of Rajesh Kumar Daria Vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, (2007) 8 SCC 785, so also in view of adjudication made by this Court in the case of Manoj Kumar Tungariya Vs. State of Rajasthan: 2016 WLC (Rajasthan) (UC) 340, observing thus:
Supreme Court of India Cites 9 - Cited by 495 - K G Balakrishnan - Full Document

Neelam Sharma vs State (Panchyati Raj Dep)Ors on 11 May, 2012

A Division Bench of this Court while dealing with somewhat similar controversy on a survey of several earlier opinions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, including in the case of Anil Kumar Gupta (supra), in a batch of intra-court appeals, lead case being D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 472/2013 - Neelam Sharma v. State of Rajasthan & Ors., held thus:--
Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur Cites 10 - Cited by 9 - M N Bhandari - Full Document

Indra Sawhney Etc. Etc vs Union Of India And Others, Etc. Etc. on 16 November, 1992

- Indira Sawhney (Supra), R.K. Sabharwal v. State of Punjab (MANU/SC/0259/1995 : 1995 (2) SCC 745), Union of India v. Virpal Singh Chauvan (MANU/SC/0113/1996 : 1995 (6) SCC 684 and Ritesh R. Sah v. Dr. Y.L. Yamul (MANU/SC/0363/1996 : 1996 (3) SCC 253)]. But the aforesaid principle applicable to vertical (social) reservations will not apply to horizontal (special) reservations. Where a special reservation for women is provided within the social reservation for Scheduled Castes, the proper procedure is first to fill up the quota for scheduled castes in order of merit and then find out the number of candidates among them who belong to the special reservation group of 'Scheduled Castes-Women'. If the number of women in such list is equal to or more than the number of special reservation quota, then there is no need for further selection towards the special reservation quota. Only if there is any shortfall, the requisite number of scheduled caste (7 of 9) [CW-14507/2018] women shall have to be taken by deleting the corresponding number of candidates from the bottom of the list relating to Scheduled Castes. To this extent, horizontal (special) reservation differs from vertical (social) reservation. Thus women selected on merit within the vertical reservation quota will be counted against the horizontal reservation for women. Let us illustrate by an example:
Supreme Court of India Cites 136 - Cited by 1429 - B P Reddy - Full Document

Shri Ritesh R. Sah vs Dr. Y.L. Yamul & Ors on 15 February, 1996

- Indira Sawhney (Supra), R.K. Sabharwal v. State of Punjab (MANU/SC/0259/1995 : 1995 (2) SCC 745), Union of India v. Virpal Singh Chauvan (MANU/SC/0113/1996 : 1995 (6) SCC 684 and Ritesh R. Sah v. Dr. Y.L. Yamul (MANU/SC/0363/1996 : 1996 (3) SCC 253)]. But the aforesaid principle applicable to vertical (social) reservations will not apply to horizontal (special) reservations. Where a special reservation for women is provided within the social reservation for Scheduled Castes, the proper procedure is first to fill up the quota for scheduled castes in order of merit and then find out the number of candidates among them who belong to the special reservation group of 'Scheduled Castes-Women'. If the number of women in such list is equal to or more than the number of special reservation quota, then there is no need for further selection towards the special reservation quota. Only if there is any shortfall, the requisite number of scheduled caste (7 of 9) [CW-14507/2018] women shall have to be taken by deleting the corresponding number of candidates from the bottom of the list relating to Scheduled Castes. To this extent, horizontal (special) reservation differs from vertical (social) reservation. Thus women selected on merit within the vertical reservation quota will be counted against the horizontal reservation for women. Let us illustrate by an example:
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 463 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document

Manoj Kumar Tungariya vs The State Of Rajasthan on 20 November, 2017

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VEERENDR SINGH SIRADHANA Order 13/07/2018 Learned counsel for the petitioners, at the very outset, submits that the controversy raised in the instant writ application is no more res-integra in view of the adjudication made by the Apex Court of the land in the case of Rajesh Kumar Daria Vs. Rajasthan Public Service Commission, (2007) 8 SCC 785, so also in view of adjudication made by this Court in the case of Manoj Kumar Tungariya Vs. State of Rajasthan: 2016 WLC (Rajasthan) (UC) 340, observing thus:
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1