Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 3 of 3 (0.33 seconds)
Documents citing Naiffa vs Central Board Of Secondary Education ... on 12 July, 1991

Prakash Chandra Kuanr vs Secretary, Board Of Secondary ... on 25 July, 1996

In Naiffa v. Central Board of Secondary Education, New Delhi :AIR 1992 Mad. 52, a candidate after completing her course was permitted to sit in the C. B. S. Examination. Her result was withheld on the ground that she was "an irregular student". The Madras High Court held that the concerned candidate should not be penalised for the mistake committed by the school and accordingly her result was directed to be published.
Orissa High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Pratham Patidar S/O Devnarayan Patidar ... vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 May, 2025

(Emphasis Supplied) 16] So far as the facts in the case of Sarla (Kr.) Supra is concerned, it is found that in the said case also the petitioner suppressed the relevant information, as it was informed that she had passed the earlier examination from Scindia Kanya Vidyalaya, Gwalior and has given the roll number also, but she has not disclosed that she had passed the earlier examination from the Central Board. 17] So far as the decision in the case of Naiffa (Supra) before the Madras High Court is concerned, it was found that there was no suppression of facts by the petitioner, and she was not at fault in the Signature Not Verified Signed by: BAHAR CHAWLA Signing time: 28-05-2025 17:42:49 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:13618 WP No.5601-2025 & 6592-2025 9 irregularities, which led to her disqualification, and in such circumstances, the Madras High Court has allowed the petition. It is also found that in the aforesaid decision, the Madras High Court has also relied upon the various decisions of the Supreme Court, the relevant paras of the said decision read as under:-
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - S Abhyankar - Full Document

Rigved vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 22 May, 2025

(Emphasis Supplied) 16] So far as the facts in the case of Sarla (Kr.) Supra is concerned, it is found that in the said case also the petitioner suppressed the relevant information, as it was informed that she had passed the earlier examination from Scindia Kanya Vidyalaya, Gwalior and has given the roll number also, but she has not disclosed that she had passed the earlier examination from the Central Board. 17] So far as the decision in the case of Naiffa (Supra) before the Madras High Court is concerned, it was found that there was no suppression of facts by the petitioner, and she was not at fault in the Signature Not Verified Signed by: BAHAR CHAWLA Signing time: 28-05-2025 17:42:49 NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:13618 WP No.5601-2025 & 6592-2025 9 irregularities, which led to her disqualification, and in such circumstances, the Madras High Court has allowed the petition. It is also found that in the aforesaid decision, the Madras High Court has also relied upon the various decisions of the Supreme Court, the relevant paras of the said decision read as under:-
Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - S Abhyankar - Full Document
1