Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.48 seconds)

Pallavi Tiwari D/O Bhagwan Tiwari vs Union Of India Thru Ministry Of Human ... on 25 October, 2010

(e) Notification dated 30.4.2010 issued by the State of U.P. by which the eligibility criteria was changed from 45% marks to 50% marks for the purposes of appearance in the Combined Entrance Examination B.Ed. 2010 is an illegal exercise of power on the part of the respondents, and thus changing the eligibility criteria from 45% to 50% when the students have already filled up their forms and the last date for submitting the same had already expired, is an action arbitrary in nature and they cannot do the same in view of the principle of promissory estoppel. Learned counsel for the petitioner in order to press the said arguments relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Himani Mehrotra Vs. High Court of Delhi, (2008) 7 SCC 11.
Allahabad High Court Cites 111 - Cited by 0 - A Kumar - Full Document

Chandra Kumar Ambilkar vs The Union Of India Through The Secretary on 13 June, 2016

In the case of Himani Mehrotra v. High Court of Delhi, MANU/SC/1844/2008 : (2008) 7 SCC 11, it has been held by Honble Apex Court that during the recruitment process the recruitment rules cannot be changed. It was held that there was prescription of minimum marks for written test only and minimum marks were not provided for viva voce. It was held that it is not permissible to provide minimum marks for viva voce.
Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur Cites 6 - Cited by 0 - Full Document
1