MAYA MATHEW versus STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

MAYA MATHEW versus STATE OF KERALA & ORS.

Note (2) to Entry 5 of the Table under Rule 3 of Special Rules prevails over Note (3) to Rule 5 of General Rules due to Rule 2 of General Rules and because the Special Rule was promulgated later. Therefore, the prescribed ratio for recruitment is to be applied to notified vacancies rather than cadre strength.

Parties
Appellant: Maya Mathew; Respondent: State of Kerala & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
18 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Recruitment Rules, Direct Recruitment Vs. Appointment by Transfer, Primacy of Special Rules Over General Rules
Service Law Interpretation of Statutes Recruitment Rules Direct Recruitment Vs. Appointment by Transfer Primacy of Special Rules Over General Rules

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Maya Mathew

Appellant

State of Kerala & Ors.

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the ratio of direct recruitment and appointment by transfer must be applied with reference to notified vacancies or cadre strength.
  2. 2 Whether Note (2) under Entry 5 of Rule 3 of Special Rules prevails over Note (3) to Rule 5 of General Rules.

Ratio Decidendi

Note (2) to Entry 5 of the Table under Rule 3 of Special Rules prevails over Note (3) to Rule 5 of General Rules due to Rule 2 of General Rules and because the Special Rule was promulgated later. Therefore, the prescribed ratio for recruitment is to be applied to notified vacancies rather than cadre strength.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application for intervention dismissed.