Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 56 (1.07 seconds)
Documents citing Indu Gupta vs Director, Sports Punjab And Anr. on 31 May, 1999

Saurabh Rathi vs M/O Railways on 16 January, 2019

Further in the case of Dr.M.Vennila vs. Tamil Nadu P.S.C. (supra), the Hon'ble Madras High Court, following the Full Bench decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Indu Gupta vs. Director, Sports, Punjab, Chandigarh (supra), has held that the terms and conditions contained in the recruitment notification have the force of law and have to be strictly complied with. No modification/relaxation can be made by the Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and application filed in violation of the Instructions, etc., to candidates, and the terms and conditions contained in the recruitment notification is liable to be rejected. Strict adherence to the terms and conditions is paramount consideration, and the same cannot be relaxed unless such power is specifically provided to a named authority by the use of clear language.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 5 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Prabhakar Kasana vs M/O Railways on 20 March, 2018

8.3 In Dr.M.Vennila vs. Tamil Nadu P.S.C. (supra), the Hon‟ble Madras High Court, following the Full Bench decision of the Hon‟ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Indu Gupta vs. Director, Sports,Punjab, Chandigarh (supra), has held that the terms and conditions contained in the recruitment notification have the force of law and have to be strictly complied with. No modification/relaxation can be made by the Court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, and application filed in violation of the Instructions, etc., to candidates, and the terms and conditions contained in the recruitment notification is liable to be rejected. Strict adherence to the terms and conditions is paramount consideration, and the same cannot be relaxed unless such power is specifically provided to a named authority by the use of clear language.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi Cites 7 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

A.K.Praveenakumari vs Tamil Nadu Public Service Commission on 26 March, 2019

22. Learned Advocate General has also placed reliance on the Full Bench decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case ofIndu Gupta v. Director, Sports Pubjab, Chandigarh, AIR 1999 P & H 319 (FB). In the case before the Full Bench, the petitioner applied for admission to B.Tech. course. She claimed the benefit of reservation under sports category. She could not get the gradation certificate countersigned by the Director of Sports, Punjab, and so she was not considered for admission under reserved category for sports personnel. The argument advanced by the counsel representing the petitioner is that gradation certificate, based on her performance in the sports meet is only evidencing the existence of fact entitling her to the benefit of reservation and so the condition that gradation certificate should be sent along with the application form for admission is only a formality and candidate may produce the gradation certificate at the time of admission. In support of the contention, the petitioner relied on the observation made by a learned single Judge in Civil Writ Petition No. 11787 of 1995 http://www.judis.nic.in 30 decided on September 8, 1995 and the reasons given by the learned single Judge were approved by a Division Bench in L.P.A. filed against that judgment by the Punjabi University, Patiala. However, in Civil Writ Petition Nos. 9211 of 1997 decided on August 26, 1997, and 12093 of 1997 decided on August 28, 1997, the other Division Benches took the view that application for admission should have been enclosed with a copy of the gradation certificate and that the candidate who produced the gradation certificate after the submission of the application is not entitled to the benefit of reservation as a sport person. In view of the divergent view, the matter was referred to Full Bench for consideration. It is seen from the factual details presented before the Full Bench that admission in the participating institutions of Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar has to be made as per the terms and conditions contained in the admission brochure/application form issued for the year 1997. In the application form it was specifically stated that all particulars required must be filled in and attested photo copies of the certificates in support of the claim made by the candidates must be attached with the http://www.judis.nic.in 31 application form. Clause 3.8 makes it clear that the application complete in all respects should reach the Co-ordinator CET-1997, Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar by 5.00 p.m. on June 25, 1997. It is also specifically stated that the application not submitted in the prescribed application form or not filled by the candidate's own handwriting or not supported by attested photocopies of the documents or incomplete application in any other manner or received after the due date/time will be rejected. The above mentioned terms and conditions contained in the brochure have been issued by Notification of the Punjab Government dated 30th January, 1997. The terms and conditions regarding eligibility, reservation, allocation of seats, gradation certificate, and public declaration are binding on the candidates as well as the party issuing the said brochure for the period in question.
Madras High Court Cites 50 - Cited by 0 - S M Subramaniam - Full Document

P.Prabhu vs The Secretary on 25 October, 2019

22. Learned Advocate General has also placed reliance on 21 the Full Bench decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Indu Gupta vs. Director, Sports Pubjab, Chandigarh reported in AIR 1999 Punjab and Haryana 319 (FB). In the case before the Full Bench, the petitioner applied for admission to B.Tech. course. She claimed the benefit of reservation under sports category. She could not get the gradation certificate countersigned by the Director of Sports, Punjab, and so she was not considered for admission under reserved category for sports personnel.
Madras High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - N A Venkatesh - Full Document

Ramgopal Sharma & Anr. vs All India Institute Of Medical Sciences on 10 November, 2021

16. We have referred to the aforesaid decisions only to highlight that the conditions stipulated in the prospectus are guidelines for all concerned and everyone is required to follow the same in letter and spirit and not act in transgression. The hopes and aspirations of the students, who came within the zone of merit, cannot be scuttled by changing the prospectus by way of introducing a corrigendum. A change in the conditions of the prospectus can be conceived of and allowed if such power is specifically reserved while making the prospectus public as in that case, no one can think of having a right. In that event, the same could be capable of change. In the case at hand, in the absence of a power reserved in the prospectus, in our considered opinion, the same could not have been altered by way of corrigendum. It is interesting to note that by issuing a corrigendum, the scenario of results changed because further results were published and more candidates were called. This, according to us, is nothing but an accommodation. The AIIMS may have been conferred the privilege of institutional preference, but that would not enable AIIMS to change the prospectus in the manner it has been done. Thus, the action of the AIIMS on this score is vitiated and despite the laboured attempt by the learned counsel for Signature Not Verified Digitally signed By:SHITU NAGPAL Signing Date:11.11.2021 16:50:38 W.P.(C) 9413/2021 Page 18 of 22 the AIIMS, we cannot give the stamp of approval to the action of the institution.
Delhi High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 1 - P Jalan - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 Next