Skip to content


D. Madanan Vs. State of Kerala and anr. - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCivil
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Judge
Reported in1980(Supp)SCC154; 1980(12)LC87(SC)
AppellantD. Madanan
RespondentState of Kerala and anr.
Excerpt:
.....by evidence of injured witnesses. thus, he was liable to be convicted for offence punishable under sections 147,323/149,342,458 and 366 of i.p.c., . - having regard to the equities of the case we are satisfied that these two persons may continue as they now are and if this position were accepted there is no need to go into the sense of the rules & pronouncement by this court on the validity of the recruitment made by govt......in this appeal relates to the application of the special rule for recruitment and appointment of fisheries inspector under the kerala state, the case has had a chequered career in the high court and the point raised perhaps involves reopening and re-examining the appointments made or refused in the past. we do not think that under the limited circumstances of the present case it is necessary so to do. the appellant and one other next below him, shri gangadhran nair, have already been appointed a fisheries inspectors after the learned single judge in the high court pronounced his judgment and pursuant thereto. although the division bench of the high court reversed that decision a stay was granted by this court at the preliminary tage. the consequence is that the appellant and shri.....
Judgment:

V.R. Krishna Iyer, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The problem raised in this appeal relates to the application of the special rule for recruitment and appointment of Fisheries Inspector under the Kerala State, The case has had a chequered career in the High Court and the point raised perhaps involves reopening and re-examining the appointments made or refused in the past. We do not think that under the limited circumstances of the present case it is necessary so to do. The appellant and one other next below him, Shri Gangadhran Nair, have already been appointed a Fisheries Inspectors after the learned Single Judge in the High Court pronounced his judgment and pursuant thereto. Although the Division Bench of the High Court reversed that decision a stay was granted by this Court at the preliminary tage. The consequence is that the appellant and Shri Gangadharan Nair have already been functioning as Fisheries Inspector for some time. Having regard to the equities of the case we are satisfied that these two persons may continue as they now are and if this position were accepted there is no need to go into the sense of the Rules & pronouncement by this Court on the validity of the recruitment made by Govt. We put it to Counsel on both sides and while the justice of the case is appreciated by both, the legal aspects, they submit, may require fuller investigation. We are not inclined to do so since the case can be disposed of by a direction, which we make, that the appellant shall continue as regularly appointed Fisheries Inspector. Beyond that, there is no need to examine the case and we dispose of the appeal with this limited direction.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //