https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168609 The Court held that the "carry forward rule" for reservation of posts, as modified in 1955, was unconstitutional as it could lead to excessive reservation exceeding 50%, violating principles of equality and efficiency of administration. The petitioner's challenge against the rule was successful, emphasizing that reservation should not surpass 50% to maintain a fair balance between backward classes and other communities. A dissenting opinion supported the validity of the rule under Article 16(4), highlighting its importance in ensuring representation without compromising efficiency. The petition was granted with costs, requiring proper implementation of the decision by the relevant department. en-us Thu, 29 Aug 1963 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Jun 2015 15:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168609 The Court held that the "carry forward rule" for reservation of posts, as modified in 1955, was unconstitutional as it could lead to excessive reservation exceeding 50%, violating principles of equality and efficiency of administration. The petitioner's challenge against the rule was successful, emphasizing that reservation should not surpass 50% to maintain a fair balance between backward classes and other communities. A dissenting opinion supported the validity of the rule under Article 16(4), highlighting its importance in ensuring representation without compromising efficiency. The petition was granted with costs, requiring proper implementation of the decision by the relevant department. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 29 Aug 1963 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168609