Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 23 (0.24 seconds)Article 16 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 21 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Article 226 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Regulations of the Tamil Nadu Agricultural University
Secretary, State Of Karnataka And ... vs Umadevi And Others on 10 April, 2006
Judge Bench, the Bench in turn felt that the matter
required consideration by a Constitution Bench in
view of the conflict and in the light of the arguments
raised by the Additional Solicitor General. The order
of reference is reported in Secy., State of Karnataka
v. Umadevi (2) [(2006) 4 SCC 44 : (2003) 10 Scale
388] . It appears to be proper to quote that order of
reference at this stage. It reads: (SCC p. 45, paras
1-5)
“1.
Article 309 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
The Dharwad Distt. P.W.D. Literate ... vs State Of Karnataka & Ors. Etc on 23 February, 1990
20. The decision in Dharwad Distt. PWD
Literate Daily Wage Employees Assn. v. State of
Karnataka [(1990) 2 SCC 396 : 1990 SCC (L&S)
15/33
http://www.judis.nic.in
WP.Nos.14983, 16964 to 16968 of 2010
274 : (1990) 12 ATC 902 : (1990) 1 SCR 544] dealt
with a scheme framed by the State of Karnataka,
though at the instance of the Court. The scheme
was essentially relating to the application of the
concept of equal pay for equal work but it also
provided for making permanent, or what it called
regularisation, without keeping the distinction in
mind, of employees who had been appointed ad hoc,
casually, temporarily or on daily-wage basis. In
other words, employees who had been appointed
without following the procedure established by law
for such appointments. This Court, at the threshold,
stated that it should individualise justice to suit a
given situation. With respect, it is not possible to
accept the statement, unqualified as it appears to
be. This Court is not only the constitutional court, it
is also the highest court in the country, the final
court of appeal. By virtue of Article 141 of the
Constitution, what this Court lays down is the law of
the land. Its decisions are binding on all the courts.
Its main role is to interpret the constitutional and
other statutory provisions bearing in mind the
fundamental philosophy of the Constitution. We
have given unto ourselves a system of governance
by rule of law. The role of the Supreme Court is to
render justice according to law. As one jurist put it,
16/33
http://www.judis.nic.in
WP.Nos.14983, 16964 to 16968 of 2010
the Supreme Court is expected to decide questions
of law for the country and not to decide individual
cases without reference to such principles of law.
Consistency is a virtue. Passing orders not
consistent with its own decisions on law, is bound to
send out confusing signals and usher in judicial
chaos. Its role, therefore, is really to interpret the
law and decide cases coming before it, according to
law. Orders which are inconsistent with the legal
conclusions arrived at by the court in the selfsame
judgment not only create confusion but also tend to
usher in arbitrariness highlighting the statement,
that equity tends to vary with the Chancellor's foot.