https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171422 SC considered whether a candidate with postgraduate and Ph.D. qualifications in Political Science was eligible for appointment as Reader in Public Administration. It read the qualification requirement in light of the expression "relevant subject" and held that the Regulations could not be construed to require an exact match of discipline where that would produce an absurd result. The Court treated the omission as supplied by necessary implication, accepted the academic view that Political Science and Public Administration are inter-related and interchangeable, and held that courts should defer to such expert opinion on subject equivalence. The appointment was upheld and the High Court's setting aside of the selection was reversed. en-us Wed, 06 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Nov 2015 09:16:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171422 SC considered whether a candidate with postgraduate and Ph.D. qualifications in Political Science was eligible for appointment as Reader in Public Administration. It read the qualification requirement in light of the expression "relevant subject" and held that the Regulations could not be construed to require an exact match of discipline where that would produce an absurd result. The Court treated the omission as supplied by necessary implication, accepted the academic view that Political Science and Public Administration are inter-related and interchangeable, and held that courts should defer to such expert opinion on subject equivalence. The appointment was upheld and the High Court's setting aside of the selection was reversed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 06 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171422