Justic S Nagamuthu said the error had been corrected by a April 30 Governemnt Order of this year. The judge said he did not want to disturb the appointments made on the basis of the old GO as it would lead to "chaos and confusion."
The petitioner S Gomathi Nayagam stated that the government had provided for reservation in direct recruitment through promulgation of an ordinance in 2010.
But, the illustration provided under the Rules for providing the reservation worked out to less than 20 per cent. The Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission too had pointed out the anomaly to the government which took four years to rectify it.
The counsel for the Government K P Krishnadoss, opposed the petitioner's plea to appoint him on the basis of the new G.O on the ground that it could be applied only prospectively. Retrospective operation would lead to chaos, he said.
You’ve reached your limit of {{free_limit}} free articles this month.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
Already subscribed? Log in
Subscribe to read the full story →
Smart Quarterly
₹900
3 Months
₹300/Month
Smart Essential
₹2,700
1 Year
₹225/Month
Super Saver
₹3,900
2 Years
₹162/Month
Renews automatically, cancel anytime
Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans
Exclusive premium stories online
Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors


Complimentary Access to The New York Times
News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic
Business Standard Epaper
Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share


Curated Newsletters
Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox
Market Analysis & Investment Insights
In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor


Archives
Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997
Ad-free Reading
Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements


Seamless Access Across All Devices
Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app
