citedby: 60144106

Vijay Goutam Dabbiru vs The Honble High Of Judicature on 24 October, 2018

In Samta Aandolan Samiti v. Union of India9, the Supreme Court was concerned with admissions to MBBS Course in the All India Institute of Medical Sciences. The actual issue before the Supreme Court in Samta Aandolan Samiti was whether the meritorious reserved category candidates, admitted to seats available in the open competition, are to be counted within the quota reserved for SCs/STs/OBCs etc.

Telangana High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - V Ramasubramanian - Full Document

Assistant Engineer (Highways) ... vs The Additional Chief Secretary To ...

19. Ritesh R. Sah (supra) was subsequently followed in Samta Aandolan Samiti v. Union of India, (2014) 14 SCC 745 wherein this Court observed thus:

Madras High Court Cites 78 - Cited by 0 - M M Sundresh - Full Document

Vijay Goutam Dabbiru, S/O. Late C.P. ... vs 1.The Honble High Court Of Judicature At ... on 24 October, 2018

In Samta Aandolan Samiti v. Union of India , the Supreme Court was concerned with admissions to MBBS Course in the All India Institute of Medical Sciences. The actual issue before the Supreme Court in Samta Aandolan Samiti was whether the meritorious reserved category candidates, admitted to seats available in the open competition, are to be counted within the quota reserved for SCs/STs/OBCs etc.

Andhra HC (Pre-Telangana) Cites 16 - Cited by 1 - J U Devi - Full Document

Shahid Anjum vs State Of U.P. & Others on 1 December, 2015

In the aforesaid decision in the case of Samta Andolan Samiti (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court clarified that a distinction is to be maintained between the cases dealing with the admission to the educational institutions and appointment to a service.

Allahabad High Court Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - S P Kesarwani - Full Document

Appellate Side vs Moumita Sen & Others on 19 April, 2016

In view of the decision in Samta Aandolan Samiti & Anr vs. Union of India & Ors reported in (2014) 14 SCC 745 the candidate from the reserved category who secures high marks is entitled to a seat in the general category and the seat vacated by such a candidate would be available for a candidate from the reserved category, next in the merit list.

Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 9 - Cited by 2 - N Mhatre - Full Document

Gunukula Srinivasa Hemanth, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 7 August, 2018

(ii) that in any case, the issue is no longer res integra in view of a long line of decisions starting from Ritesh R. Shah v. Dr. Y.L. Yamul2, and reaffirmed in Samta Aandolan Samti v. Union of India3 and in Tripurari Sharan v. Ranjit Kumar Yadav4, where circulars identical to the impugned Government Order were under consideration;

Telangana High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Gutta Rishitha, vs Dr.Ntr University Of Helath Sciences, on 7 August, 2018

(ii) that in any case, the issue is no longer res integra in view of a long line of decisions starting from Ritesh R. Shah v. Dr. Y.L. Yamul2, and reaffirmed in Samta Aandolan Samti v. Union of India3 and in Tripurari Sharan v. Ranjit Kumar Yadav4, where circulars identical to the impugned Government Order were under consideration;

Telangana High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Suraparaju Likhitha Manohar vs Dr.Ntr University Of Helath Sciences, on 7 August, 2018

(ii) that in any case, the issue is no longer res integra in view of a long line of decisions starting from Ritesh R. Shah v. Dr. Y.L. Yamul2, and reaffirmed in Samta Aandolan Samti v. Union of India3 and in Tripurari Sharan v. Ranjit Kumar Yadav4, where circulars identical to the impugned Government Order were under consideration;

Telangana High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

P.Mahati, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 7 August, 2018

(ii) that in any case, the issue is no longer res integra in view of a long line of decisions starting from Ritesh R. Shah v. Dr. Y.L. Yamul2, and reaffirmed in Samta Aandolan Samti v. Union of India3 and in Tripurari Sharan v. Ranjit Kumar Yadav4, where circulars identical to the impugned Government Order were under consideration;

Telangana High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Pasumarthi Sumedha, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh, on 7 August, 2018

(ii) that in any case, the issue is no longer res integra in view of a long line of decisions starting from Ritesh R. Shah v. Dr. Y.L. Yamul2, and reaffirmed in Samta Aandolan Samti v. Union of India3 and in Tripurari Sharan v. Ranjit Kumar Yadav4, where circulars identical to the impugned Government Order were under consideration;

Telangana High Court Cites 19 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Search Results Page

Refine Search

Search Results