Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.79 seconds)

Mohan Lal Gupta vs D.A.V. College Managing Committee ... on 23 January, 2004

It was contended that there is no bar to the maintainability of the writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, if the order passed by the respondent was patently illegal and void and in this regard has placed reliance on Sahdeo Singh Solanki Vs. Government of NCT of Delhi . Ms. Mittal has also contended that Rule 98 of Delhi School Education Rules applies to both aided as well as unaided schools. It was contended that whole of Chapter VIII of Rules applies to the private school whether aided or unaided other than unaided minority school. It was contended that where a provision is meant specifically for aided school the same has been clarified in the provision itself.
Delhi High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Rajeev Khurana vs Principal, Saraswati Bal Mandir And Ors on 21 February, 2025

22. Next, he submitted that SSS had in fact sought approval of the DOE by a letter dated 22.04.1998 but had not received any response from the DoE. He submitted that in the aforesaid circumstances, it must be inferred that the DOE had approved the termination of the appellant's services. He also referred the decision of the Division Bench of this court in Sahdeo Singh Solanki v. Government of NCT of Delhi6 and submitted that in the said case the contention that prior approval is deemed to have been granted was rejected for the reasons that the letter seeking the approval of the DOE was sent on the same date on which the services of the employee were terminated. However, the observations made by the court indicated that there would be a 6 1996 SCC OnLine Del 764 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:TARUN RANA LPA No.780/2013 Page 8 of 31 Signing Date:21.02.2025 16:26:53 deemed approval, if a reasonable time was granted to the DOE for satisfying itself as to the said request.
Delhi High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - V Bakhru - Full Document
1