https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180293 An assistant teacher in a Basic Primary School run through the State-controlled basic education framework was treated as holding an office of profit under the State Government. The Court applied a substance-over-form test, focusing on governmental control, appointment and disciplinary powers, and financial dependence of the Board on State funds. Because the Board functioned as an instrumentality of Government and the employee's post was effectively under State control, the disqualification under Article 191(1)(a) was attracted. The rejection of the nomination was therefore valid, and the election challenge failed. en-us Wed, 23 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 29 Dec 2016 18:56:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180293 An assistant teacher in a Basic Primary School run through the State-controlled basic education framework was treated as holding an office of profit under the State Government. The Court applied a substance-over-form test, focusing on governmental control, appointment and disciplinary powers, and financial dependence of the Board on State funds. Because the Board functioned as an instrumentality of Government and the employee's post was effectively under State control, the disqualification under Article 191(1)(a) was attracted. The rejection of the nomination was therefore valid, and the election challenge failed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 23 Nov 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180293