RICHA MISHRA versus STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ORS.

RICHA MISHRA versus STATE OF CHHATTISGARH AND ORS.

The Supreme Court held that, although the recruitment was validly undertaken under the 2000 Rules (which did not provide age relaxation for women), Rule 4 of the 1997 Rules, read with Examination Rules, 2003, specifically grants women candidates a ten-year age relaxation. These special rules are statutory, have universal application for women's appointments in public service, and fill the omission in Rule 8 of the 2000 Rules. Therefore, the appellant was entitled to be considered for Dy.S.P. with the benefit of age relaxation.

Parties
Appellant: Richa Mishra; Respondents: State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
08 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Age Relaxation, Women's Reservation, Interpretation of Service Rules, Affirmative Action
Service Law Constitutional Law Age Relaxation Women's Reservation Interpretation of Service Rules Affirmative Action

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 3 Authorities cited 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Richa Mishra

Appellant

State of Chhattisgarh and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Is Richa Mishra entitled to age relaxation as a woman candidate under Rule 4 of Madhya Pradesh Civil Services (Special Provision for Appointment of Women) Rules, 1997 read with State Services Examination Rules, 2003 for the post of Dy.S.P. despite Chhattisgarh Police Executive (Gazetted) Service Recruitment and Promotion Rules, 2000 not containing such provision?
  2. 2 Does the specific provision for age relaxation in Rule 4 of the 1997 Rules override the absence of such benefit in Rule 8 of the 2000 Rules?

Ratio Decidendi

The Supreme Court held that, although the recruitment was validly undertaken under the 2000 Rules (which did not provide age relaxation for women), Rule 4 of the 1997 Rules, read with Examination Rules, 2003, specifically grants women candidates a ten-year age relaxation. These special rules are statutory, have universal application for women's appointments in public service, and fill the omission in Rule 8 of the 2000 Rules. Therefore, the appellant was entitled to be considered for Dy.S.P. with the benefit of age relaxation.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Respondents directed to appoint appellant Richa Mishra as Dy.S.P. with effect from the date her juniors in the merit list were appointed.
  • Her seniority and pay to be fixed accordingly; intervening period to count for all purposes except salary.