https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463974 The SC allowed the appeal by the appellant against the HC's majority decision, setting aside the declaration that Rules 5, 8 and 10 of the University Calendar (appointing women as principals, preferring women teachers and women hostel/medical staff) violated Articles 14 and 16. The Court held the classification based on sex was reasonable, had nexus with the object of protecting girl students, and was permissible as a special provision under Article 15(3). The minority view that the rules are constitutional was upheld; no order as to costs. en-us Tue, 23 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 25 Sep 2025 13:10:37 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463974 The SC allowed the appeal by the appellant against the HC's majority decision, setting aside the declaration that Rules 5, 8 and 10 of the University Calendar (appointing women as principals, preferring women teachers and women hostel/medical staff) violated Articles 14 and 16. The Court held the classification based on sex was reasonable, had nexus with the object of protecting girl students, and was permissible as a special provision under Article 15(3). The minority view that the rules are constitutional was upheld; no order as to costs. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 23 Sep 2003 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=463974