The government in its objections said that granting exemption was at its pleasure and was limited to persons who had incurred disability. Radharani was undeserving of it since the rule was framed with the sole objective of “ensuring people of high morality are appointed to the state civil service”.
Justice AN Venugopala Gowda's judgement also touches on a case of personal law such as Mohammedan law, being in conflict with statutory laws.
Citing the Mohd Ahmed Khan vs Shah Bano Begum case, Justice Gowda states, "The Constitution bench has laid down two principles; firstly, the two provisions operate in different fields and, therefore, there is no conflict, and secondly, even if there is a conflict, it should be set at rest by holding that the statutory law will prevail over the personal law of the parties, in cases where they are in conflict."
