Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.25 seconds)Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 32 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Gaya Baksh Yadav vs Union Of India And Ors on 9 May, 1996
In Chennai Customs Appraisers Officers Association (supra) the
interpretation of 1961 Rules, and Department of Revenue (Customs
Appraisers) Recruitment Rules, 1988, in the context of the decision in
Mervyn Continho's case and in Gaya Baksh's case came up for
consideration before Supreme Court. In the above cases, challenge was
against two seniority lists of Appraisers dated 16.12.2004 and 28.2.2005.
Supreme Court noted that the terminologies used in 1961 Rules and 1988
Rules were different. Broadly speaking, 1961 Rules speak of "cadre",
whereas 1988 Rules speak of "vacancies". It was observed that in 1961
Rules separate quotas for different categories of employees have not been
fixed. If there was no quota, indisputably, the principles of Rota will have
no application, it was held.
Chennai Customs Appraising Officers ... vs Union Of India & Ors on 16 May, 2008
In Chennai Customs Appraisers Officers Association (supra) the
interpretation of 1961 Rules, and Department of Revenue (Customs
Appraisers) Recruitment Rules, 1988, in the context of the decision in
Mervyn Continho's case and in Gaya Baksh's case came up for
consideration before Supreme Court. In the above cases, challenge was
against two seniority lists of Appraisers dated 16.12.2004 and 28.2.2005.
Supreme Court noted that the terminologies used in 1961 Rules and 1988
Rules were different. Broadly speaking, 1961 Rules speak of "cadre",
whereas 1988 Rules speak of "vacancies". It was observed that in 1961
Rules separate quotas for different categories of employees have not been
fixed. If there was no quota, indisputably, the principles of Rota will have
no application, it was held.
Mervyn Coutindo & Ors vs Collector Of Customs, Bombay & Ors on 14 February, 1966
20. It is pertinent to note that Mervyn Continho's case arose at a stage
where there was no Statutory Rules governing the subject, till 1961, when
the Customs Appraisers Service Class II Recruitment Rules 1961 was
introduced. Clause 3 of Rule 4 of the said Rules provided that the
percentage of posts to be filled by direct recruitment by competitive
examination, or by selection otherwise than by competitive examination,
shall not be less than 50% of the total cadre of Appraisers and the
remaining posts may be filled by any other method mentioned in Rule 3
(emphasis supplied). Thus, regarding the percentage of direct recruits, it
was specifically provided that it shall not be less than 50%, thereby
indicating that it could be higher than 50%. Clearly this indicated that by
virtue of 1961 Rules, no specific quota was prescribed for direct recruits,
and resultantly Quota Rule was broken.
1