https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277758 Appointments made in the Travancore-Cochin judicial service before formal Article 234 rules were treated as valid because consultation requirements related to the rule-making framework, not each appointment, and the Public Service Commission's acts were protected by the de facto doctrine. In service integration under the States Reorganisation Act, posts were equated on functional parity by considering duties, powers, jurisdiction, and pay, and the arrangements for reservation, separate cadres, and inter se seniority were held fair and non-discriminatory. Temporary service under Rule 11(2), the training period, and war service were excluded from inter-State seniority because they had not counted as seniority-bearing service in the parent State. en-us Wed, 02 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 21 Dec 2018 12:24:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277758 Appointments made in the Travancore-Cochin judicial service before formal Article 234 rules were treated as valid because consultation requirements related to the rule-making framework, not each appointment, and the Public Service Commission's acts were protected by the de facto doctrine. In service integration under the States Reorganisation Act, posts were equated on functional parity by considering duties, powers, jurisdiction, and pay, and the arrangements for reservation, separate cadres, and inter se seniority were held fair and non-discriminatory. Temporary service under Rule 11(2), the training period, and war service were excluded from inter-State seniority because they had not counted as seniority-bearing service in the parent State. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 02 Apr 1969 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=277758