Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.41 seconds)
Documents citing Medical Council Of India vs Union Of India Etc on 13 February, 2009

Punjab Private Self Financed Dental ... vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 2 September, 2014

Article 15(5) of the Constitution of India was upheld by the Apex Court in Indian Medical Council's case (supra) wherein the issue was regarding the right of the Army Welfare Education Society to make admissions in the Army College of Medical Sciences, located at New Delhi and to admit students who were the wards and children of the current and former Army personnel. It was, however, held that the admission procedure devised for admitting students to the MBBS course from a pre-defined source, carved out by itself was ultra vires of the Delhi Act, 2007, whereas Clause 5 of Article 15 did not violate the basic structure of the Constitution.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 45 - Cited by 4 - G S Sandhawalia - Full Document

Dr. Madan Lal vs Medical Council Of India & Others on 17 July, 2009

After hearing learned counsel for the parties, we find that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by the judgment of this Court, passed in CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004, in as much as, while holding that the respondents, in that case, were held eligible for appointment to the post C.W.P. NO. 8194 of 2005 -4- of Senior Lecturer (Microbiology) or Senior Lecturer (Biochemistry) not only on the two grounds, as mentioned above, by Sh. Gurminder Singh, learned counsel for Medical Council of India but also on various other grounds and especially, keeping in mind the fact that although the Medical Council of India recognized certain institutes for awarding degree of M.Sc. (Microbiology) and M.Sc. (Biochemistry), still, these institutes were not actually awarding any such degree at that time as also the fact that the advertisement itself was in doubt with respect to the qualification so specified of M.Sc. (Microbiology). The plea of the respondents to consider them for appointment, was accepted on yet another account. The respective departments of the contesting respondents are non clinical and there is a specific provision in the 1971 Regulations as well as under the 1998 Regulations for recruiting non-medical teachers in the Medical Colleges in the non-clinical subjects to the extent of 30% in the department of Microbiology and 50% in the department of Biochemistry.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - K N Kaur - Full Document

Union Public Service Commission vs Dr. Navneet Agnihotri And Others on 19 February, 2014

The writ petitions preferred by UPSC and MCI in those matters stand dismissed in CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004 titled as Medical Council of India vs. Union of India, etc., decided on 13.2.2009 and CWP No.13245-CAT of 2004 titled: Medical Council of India vs. Dr. Navneet Agnihotri and others, decided on 30.8.2004. Thus, the challenge laid by the Medical Council of India to the same order stands repelled while the present petition has been filed by UPSC. The present petition, in fact, had to be heard along with those petitions and is, thus, also dismissed in terms of the aforesaid orders.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dr. Indu Verma vs Union Of India & Others on 7 May, 2009

The fact that the respondents want to file SLPs in similar matters would not be a ground to not to allow this writ petition in the same terms as CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004, titled as Medical Council of India vs. Union of India etc. CWP No.1490 of 2008 -2- In view of the above, we set aside the impugned Clause 21 of "General Remarks" of Annexure P-20 and Annexure P-28 and allow the writ petition in terms of the ratio in CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dr. Satinder Kaur vs Union Of India & Others on 7 May, 2009

The fact that the respondents want to file SLPs in similar matters would not be a ground to not to allow this writ petition in the same terms as CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004, titled as Medical Council of India vs. Union of India etc. CWP No.1496 of 2008 -2- In view of the above, we set aside the impugned Clause 21 of "General Remarks" of Annexure P-17 and Annexure P-23 and allow the writ petition in terms of the ratio in CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dr. Rajinder Kumar Chawla vs Baba Farid University Of Health on 7 May, 2009

The fact that the respondents want to file SLPs in similar matters would not be a ground to not to allow this writ petition in the same terms as CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004, titled as Medical Council of India vs. Union of India etc. CWP No.11289 of 2004 -2- In view of the above, we set aside the impugned orders (Annexure P-13 and P-14) and allow the writ petition in terms of the ratio in CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dr. A.P.S. Narang vs Union Of India & Others on 7 May, 2009

The fact that the respondents want to file SLPs in similar matters would not be a ground to not to allow this writ petition in the same terms as CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004, titled as Medical Council of India vs. Union of India etc. CWP No.3225 of 2008 -2- In view of the above, we set aside the impugned orders (Annexure P-10 and P-11) and allow the writ petition in terms of the ratio in CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 3 - Full Document

Dr. Rama Gupta vs Union Of India & Others on 8 May, 2009

The fact that the respondents want to file SLPs in similar matters would not be a ground to not to allow this writ petition in the same terms as CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004, titled as Medical Council of India vs. Union of India etc. CWP No.1495 of 2008 -2- In view of the above, we set aside the impugned Clause 21 of "General Remarks" of Annexure P-20 and Annexure P-28 and allow the writ petition in terms of the ratio in CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dr. Renuka Sood vs Union Of India & Others on 7 May, 2009

The fact that the respondents want to file SLPs in similar matters would not be a ground to not to allow this writ petition in the same terms as CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004, titled as Medical Council of India vs. Union of India etc. CWP No.1840 of 2008 -2- In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order Annexure P-12 and Clause 21 of "General Remarks" of Annexure P-31 and allow the writ petition in terms of the ratio in CWP No.4698-CAT of 2004.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1