- Case
- DR. SHARMAD v. THE STATE OF KERALA (Supreme Court of India, 10-01-2025)
- Law
- Administrative Tribunals Act, Constitution of India.
Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985: Section 19 is mentioned as the section under which Dr. Jyothish filed the original application before the Kerala Administrative Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the application, but the High Court set aside the Tribunal's judgment.
Constitution of India, 1949: Article 309 is mentioned in the context of recruitment rules for the Medical Education Service under the Health and Family Welfare Department, Govt. of Kerala. The judgment notes that rules under the proviso to clause (2) of Article 309 have not been framed, and recruitment has been made based on Government Orders.
Kerala State and Subordinate Services Rules, 1958: Rules 10 and 28 of Part II of the KS and SSR are discussed. Dr. Jyothish argued that Dr. Sharmad did not possess the requisite experience to satisfy mandatory eligibility qualifications, relying on these rules. Rule 10(ab) is analyzed in detail, with the court concluding that it is irrelevant and immaterial for appointment on promotion in the Administrative and Teaching Cadres of the Medical Education Services. The court interprets the "unless otherwise specified" clause in Rule 10(ab) and its relation to Government Order dated 07th April, 2008. Rule 28(b)(1A) is also discussed, with the court finding that it does not apply in this case because there was a qualified candidate for promotion.
General Principles of Law: The judgment discusses the maxim "expressio unius est exclusio alterius" (meaning whatever has not been included has impliedly been excluded) in relation to the interpretation of the Government Order dated 07th April, 2008. The court also discusses the principle that no word, phrase, or expression used in legislation should be excluded as surplusage during interpretation. The intention of the rule framer is assessed on both the words used and necessary implication.
