https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281950 Where a Central notification under Section 213(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 prescribes only minimum qualifications for recruitment in the State transport department, the State may validly require higher qualifications under its service rules made under Article 309, because the power to appoint includes the ancillary power to prescribe fit recruitment standards. Repugnancy under Article 254 arises only when the Central and State provisions are so inconsistent that they cannot operate together. On that basis, the State rules were held consistent with the Central minimum standard and not void for conflict. en-us Fri, 06 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Jul 2019 10:44:15 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281950 Where a Central notification under Section 213(4) of the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 prescribes only minimum qualifications for recruitment in the State transport department, the State may validly require higher qualifications under its service rules made under Article 309, because the power to appoint includes the ancillary power to prescribe fit recruitment standards. Repugnancy under Article 254 arises only when the Central and State provisions are so inconsistent that they cannot operate together. On that basis, the State rules were held consistent with the Central minimum standard and not void for conflict. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 06 May 1994 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281950