Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 23 (1.75 seconds)
Documents citing Vibhu Kapoor vs Council Of Indian School Certificate ... on 15 February, 1985

Sushil Kumar vs Central Registrar Of Coop Socy And Ors on 19 July, 2022

28. Reference can also be made to the judgment in Master Vibhu Kapoor v. Council of Indian School Certificate Examination, 27 (1985) Delhi Law Times (SN) 14, where, the writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, was filed against withholding of the result of petitioner, a minor, on the allegation of use of unfair means, in the examination of class X conducted by the Council of Indian School Certificate Examination, a private body, registered under the Societies Regulation Act of 1860. The Division Bench held that the functions, being performed by the Society, were conducting public examination and awarding certificates. It was thus held that the writ petition was maintainable against the Society.
Delhi High Court Cites 96 - Cited by 7 - Y Varma - Full Document

Sri Dipak Sen vs Asiatic Society And Ors. on 24 April, 1987

Master Bibhu Kapoor v. Council of Indian School Certificate Examination and Am. relied on by the petitioner is a Full Bench decision of the Delhi High Court. In this case, the respondent was a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act who entered into an arrangement with the Government to enable it to discharge its public function of imparting education and thereby not only received concessions and privilege and authority to conduct public examination but was statutorily recognised by Section 2(a) of Delhi Education Act as a body of persons or a Society recognised and authorised by the Government to discharge the public or the Governmental function of imparting education. The rules and regulations of the Society established Governmental supervision and control on the Society by two of the members of the society to be nominated by the Government. On constructions of its rules and regulations, the Full Bench held that the Society must be deemed not only functionally but also structurally deeply impregnated with Governmental character and was admittedly discharging a public function and was an 'authority' within the meaning of Article 12.
Calcutta High Court Cites 30 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Ram Parshad vs Indian Institute Of Bankers on 14 May, 1991

In Master Vibhu Kapoor v. Council of Indian School Certificate Examination. AIR 1985 Delhi 142 (FB), the question for consideration was whether the Council for Indian School Certificate Examination which was a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act, 1860, was an instrumentality of the State within Art. 12/226 of the Constitution of India. It was observed that the Council had entered into an arrangement with the Government to enable it to discharge its public functions of imparting education and thereby had not only received the authority or concession or privilege to conduct public examinations but had been statutorily recognised by S. 2(s) of the Delhi Education Act as a body of persons or a Society recognized and authorised by the Government to discharge the public function or the Government function of imparting education. The rules and regulations of the Council also showed that there was governmental supervision, if not control, over the working of the Council. It was, therefore, held that the Council not only structurally but also functionally was deeply impregnated with governmental character and was discharging a public function. The Council was, therefore, held to be an authority within the meaning of Art. 226 of the Constitution (vide paragraph 34).
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 10 - H S Bedi - Full Document

Sadhu Varahala Babu And Ors. vs Government Of A.P., Co-Operation ... on 29 April, 2005

In Master Vibhu Kapoor v. Council of Indian School Certificate Examination, the Delhi High Court held that the Council of Indian School Certificate Examination is a society registered under the Societies Registration Act. It exercises a public function of imparting education. The council is deeply impregnated with governmental character not only structurally, but also functionally, therefore, the Council is an instrumentality of the State.
Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 45 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Vijay Singh vs Wadia Institute Of Himalayan Geology ... on 25 May, 1989

(13) Under similar circumstances, this court in a case reported as Master Vibhu Kapoor vs. Council of Indian School Certificate Education and another, examined the Rules end Regulations of the respondent society to decide if it ha'; acquired the statutory recognition by the State thus bringing the society within the definition of "State". During the course of the discussion, the Division Bench observed as under:-- "THE Rules and regulations of the first respondent read earlier show governmental supervision, if not control. Two of the members of the society are to be nominated by the Government which. at its choice may either be full even less on assessors. The Director of Education/public institutions (or his deputy) of the State in which a school affiliated to the first respondent exists is a member of the society. So not only functional but also structurally the first respondent is deeply impregnated with governmental character and is admittedly discharging the public function.
Delhi High Court Cites 12 - Cited by 1 - Full Document

Sushila Devi Bhaskar vs Ishwar Nagar Cooperative House ... on 11 October, 1991

(27) Reference can also be made to the judgment in Master Vibhu Kapoor v. Council of Indian School Certificate Examination and Another, 27 (1985) Delhi Law Times (SN) 14, where, the writ petition, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, was filed against withholding of the result of petitioner, a minor, on the allegation of use of unfair means, in the examination of class X conducted by the Council of Indian School Certificate Examination, a private body, registered under the Societies Regulation Act of 1860. The Division Bench held that the functions, being performed by the Society, were conducting public. examination and awarding certificates. It was thus held that the writ petition was maintainable against the Society.
Delhi High Court Cites 28 - Cited by 16 - Full Document
1   2 3 Next