SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1989 Supreme(Guj) 124

R.C.MANKAD
V. V. BHRAMKSHTRIYA – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: K.R.BRAHMBHATT, M.A.BUKHARI, N.J.MEHTA

R. C. MANKAD, J.

( 1 ) THIS group of petitions though it involves conflict of interest between direct recruits and promotees does not raise the usual controversy of inter se seniority between them. The main dispute here centres around the Rule fixing the quota of direct recruits and promotees and the contention of the rival groups is that this Rule has been violated. The stand of the State Government however. is that it has adhered to the quota rule and no appointments have been made in breach thereof.

( 2 ) IN order to appreciate the rival contentions it is necessary to refer to the facts and the background in which. The question regarding fulfilment of quota Rule has arisen before me. The Rules called Executive Engineers (XEN for short) (Civil) Gujarat Service of Engineers Class-I Recruitment Rules 1979 (GSE Class-I Rules for short) and Deputy Engineers (DEN for short) (Civil) Gujarat Service of Engineers Class-II Recruitment Rules 1979 (GSE Class-II Rules for short) were made by the Governor of Gujarat in exercise of powers conferred upon him by proviso to Art. 309 of the Constitution of India. Rule 2 of GSE Class-I Rules lays down how appointment to. The posts of XENs (Civil) in

































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top