Union of India (Uoi) Vs. Pooranchandra Rao - Court Judgment
|Court||Supreme Court of India|
|Case Number||Civil Appeal No. 431 of 1976|
|Judge|| Baharul Islam and; E.S. Venkataramiah, JJ.|
|Reported in||1982(1)SCALE514; (1982)2SCC41|
|Appellant||Union of India (Uoi)|
.....provisions of the impugned act were intra vires and did not offend art. 14 of the constitution. on appeal by special leave challenging the vires of s. 2(b) and the proviso to s. 4(1) of the act, held (per sinha, c.j., gajendragadkar and shah, jj.), that the equality before law, guaranteed by art. 14, no doubt prohibits class legislation but it does not prohibit the legislature to legislate on the basis of a reasonable classification. if any state off acts can reasonably be conceived to sustain a classification, the existence of that state of facts must be assumed. chiranjitlal choudhuri v. the union of india and others,  s.c.r. 869 and kedar nath bajoria v. the state of west bengal,  s.c.r. 30, followed. where the classification is reasonable and is founded on an intelligible.....order1. this appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 11.12.1974 in writ appeal no. 324 of 1973 dismissing a l.p.a against the order of the learned single judge of the high court of andhra pradesh in writ petition no. 940 of 1972 issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus to the appellants directing them to interview the respondent for the post of assistant director of census operations in the office of the director of census operations hyderabad and to decide whether he could be appointed in the said post. the division bench, which heard the l.p.a. has held that the application of the respondent who was the petitioner in the writ petition had not been duly considered by the union public service commission and that there was violation of article 14 and article 16 of the.....
1. This appeal is filed against the judgment and order dated 11.12.1974 in Writ Appeal No. 324 of 1973 dismissing a L.P.A against the order of the learned single Judge of the High Court of Andhra Pradesh in Writ Petition No. 940 of 1972 issuing a writ in the nature of mandamus to the appellants directing them to interview the respondent for the post of Assistant Director of Census Operations in the office of the Director of Census Operations Hyderabad and to decide whether he could be appointed in the said post. The Division Bench, which heard the L.P.A. has held that the application of the respondent who was the petitioner in the writ petition had not been duly considered by the Union Public Service Commission and that there was violation of Article 14 and Article 16 of the Constitution. Ongoing through the judgment of the learned single Judge and of the Division Bench we are of the opinion that the finding that the Union Public Service Commission had not duly considered the case of the respondent No question of law arises for consideration. Division Bench of the High Court does not call The appeal is dismissed with costs.