Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 91 (0.93 seconds)
Documents citing Medical Council Of India vs Sarang & Ors on 28 August, 2001

Kle Societys College Of Education vs National Council For Teacher Education ... on 17 April, 2023

"19. It is not advisable for courts to interfere with the functioning of the educational institutions, which have expertise in their field. It would be highly inappropriate to tinker with the decision of the educational bodies without realizing the pros and cons of the situation. There is no allegation of mala fide against the University or its officers. The Academic Ordinance is applicable uniformly to all the students. Any interference on the ground of one reason or the other would dilute the sanctity of the Academic Ordinance. The same is not permissible in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution when the validity of the Ordinance remained unchallenged. Reliance can be placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of The University of Mysore and Anr vs C. D. Govinda Rao and Anr, Maharashtra State Board Of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education vs Paritosh Bhupesh Kumar Sheth Etc., Bhushan Uttam Khare vs Dean, B.J. Medical College and Ors., Medical Council Of India vs Sarang and Ors. and U.P. Public Service Commission vs Rahul Singh."
Delhi High Court Cites 25 - Cited by 0 - P K Kaurav - Full Document

Madha Dental College & Hospital vs The Union Of India on 22 September, 2010

20. The decisions relied upon by the learned counsel for the respondents in Medical Council of India v. State of Karnataka, (1998) 6 SCC 131 and Medical Council of India v. Sarang, (2001) 8 SCC 427, are to the effect that standards have been laid down by the Medical Council, an expert body, for the purpose of imparting proper medical education and for maintaining uniform standards of medical education throughout the country and seats in colleges cannot be increased indiscriminately without regard to proper infrastructure as per the regulations of the Medical Council and that in the matters of academic standards, Courts should not normally interfere or interpret the rules and such matters should be left to the experts in the field.
Madras High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 16 - V Dhanapalan - Full Document

Buddhabhushan Anand Londhe Another vs Union Of India & Ors. on 3 May, 2023

- 26 - Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:3121 is not permissible in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution when the validity of the Ordinance remained unchallenged. Reliance can be placed on the decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of The University of Mysore and Anr vs C. D. Govinda Rao and Anr, Maharashtra State Board Of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education vs Paritosh Bhupesh Kumar Sheth Etc., Bhushan Uttam Khare vs Dean, B.J. Medical College and Ors., Medical Council Of India vs Sarang and Ors. and U.P. Public Service Commission v. Rahul Singh."
Delhi High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 3 - P K Kaurav - Full Document

Prabhoor Singh Hayer And Others vs . on 30 January, 2009

In Medical Council of India Vs. Sarang and others, AIR 2001 Supreme Court 3300, the Apex Court was interpreting Regulation 6(5) of the M.C.I. Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997, which stipulated that on migration, a student should Civil Writ Petition No. 17820 of 2008 - 26 - complete 18 months of study in transfer college after the date of migration before appearing for second year MBBS examination. On behalf of the students, it was argued that the Regulations can be interpreted in a manner that could give benefit to the students studying in a college where he was transferred on migration. That contention was accepted by the High Court but repelled by the Supreme Court. Their Lordship's held that the strained meaning given by the High Court to Regulation 6(5) of the Regulations actually re-wrote the Regulation itself, which was not permissible. The Court also held that in academic matters, the Court should not normally interfere and interpret the Rules and should leave the matters to experts in the field and observed:-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - T S Thakur - Full Document

Prabhoor Singh Hayer And Others vs . on 30 January, 2009

In Medical Council of India Vs. Sarang and others, AIR 2001 Supreme Court 3300, the Apex Court was interpreting Regulation 6(5) of the M.C.I. Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 1997, which stipulated that on migration, a student should Civil Writ Petition No. 17820 of 2008 - 26 - complete 18 months of study in transfer college after the date of migration before appearing for second year MBBS examination. On behalf of the students, it was argued that the Regulations can be interpreted in a manner that could give benefit to the students studying in a college where he was transferred on migration. That contention was accepted by the High Court but repelled by the Supreme Court. Their Lordship's held that the strained meaning given by the High Court to Regulation 6(5) of the Regulations actually re-wrote the Regulation itself, which was not permissible. The Court also held that in academic matters, the Court should not normally interfere and interpret the Rules and should leave the matters to experts in the field and observed:-
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - T S Thakur - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next