Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 19 (0.87 seconds)
Documents citing Association Of The Managements Of ... vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 26 July, 2006

Adarsh Shikshan Prasarak Mandal, ... vs Parag Sharad Chaudhari And Others on 18 December, 2020

In the said petition, the petitioners had invited attention of the Honourable High Court to the decision of the Honourable High Court thereby quashing regional reservations provided in the admission broacher of the admission process for private Engineering Colleges, i.e. the judgmentin the cae of Association of the Managements of Unaided Engineering Colleges Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2006 (6) Bom.C.R. 792, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has specifically declared regional reservation provided for Engineering courses by declaring that in absence of any Statute thereby carving out exception to the provisions of Article 15 to provide regional quota, 70% reservation provided on regional criteria was unconstitutional and was beyond the authority of the committee formed for conducting Entrance Eligibility Test. The said decision is squarely applicable for the admission process for Medical and allied courses. The ::: Uploaded on - 19/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2020 03:44:32 ::: 29 wp 6460.20+ Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 03 rd May 2017 passed in WP No. 12567 of 2016 called upon the respondents to justify how the regional reservation provided for medical courses is sustainable in absence of any legislation.
Bombay High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S V Gangapurwala - Full Document

Parag Sharad Chaudhari And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra on 18 December, 2020

In the said petition, the petitioners had invited attention of the Honourable High Court to the decision of the Honourable High Court thereby quashing regional reservations provided in the admission broacher of the admission process for private Engineering Colleges, i.e. the judgmentin the cae of Association of the Managements of Unaided Engineering Colleges Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2006 (6) Bom.C.R. 792, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has specifically declared regional reservation provided for Engineering courses by declaring that in absence of any Statute thereby carving out exception to the provisions of Article 15 to provide regional quota, 70% reservation provided on regional criteria was unconstitutional and was beyond the authority of the committee formed for conducting Entrance Eligibility Test. The said decision is squarely applicable for the admission process for Medical and allied courses. The ::: Uploaded on - 19/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2020 03:43:55 ::: 29 wp 6460.20+ Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 03 rd May 2017 passed in WP No. 12567 of 2016 called upon the respondents to justify how the regional reservation provided for medical courses is sustainable in absence of any legislation.
Bombay High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S V Gangapurwala - Full Document

Nirmayee Yogesh Chiplonkar And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 18 December, 2020

In the said petition, the petitioners had invited attention of the Honourable High Court to the decision of the Honourable High Court thereby quashing regional reservations provided in the admission broacher of the admission process for private Engineering Colleges, i.e. the judgmentin the cae of Association of the Managements of Unaided Engineering Colleges Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2006 (6) Bom.C.R. 792, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has specifically declared regional reservation provided for Engineering courses by declaring that in absence of any Statute thereby carving out exception to the provisions of Article 15 to provide regional quota, 70% reservation provided on regional criteria was unconstitutional and was beyond the authority of the committee formed for conducting Entrance Eligibility Test. The said decision is squarely applicable for the admission process for Medical and allied courses. The ::: Uploaded on - 19/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2020 03:45:00 ::: 29 wp 6460.20+ Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 03 rd May 2017 passed in WP No. 12567 of 2016 called upon the respondents to justify how the regional reservation provided for medical courses is sustainable in absence of any legislation.
Bombay High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S V Gangapurwala - Full Document

Arun Deorao Varat And Another vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 18 December, 2020

In the said petition, the petitioners had invited attention of the Honourable High Court to the decision of the Honourable High Court thereby quashing regional reservations provided in the admission broacher of the admission process for private Engineering Colleges, i.e. the judgmentin the cae of Association of the Managements of Unaided Engineering Colleges Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2006 (6) Bom.C.R. 792, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has specifically declared regional reservation provided for Engineering courses by declaring that in absence of any Statute thereby carving out exception to the provisions of Article 15 to provide regional quota, 70% reservation provided on regional criteria was unconstitutional and was beyond the authority of the committee formed for conducting Entrance Eligibility Test. The said decision is squarely applicable for the admission process for Medical and allied courses. The ::: Uploaded on - 19/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2020 03:44:16 ::: 29 wp 6460.20+ Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 03 rd May 2017 passed in WP No. 12567 of 2016 called upon the respondents to justify how the regional reservation provided for medical courses is sustainable in absence of any legislation.
Bombay High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S V Gangapurwala - Full Document

Bharat Ganpatrao Ghodke And Another vs Santosh Sudham Ambedkar And Others on 18 December, 2020

In the said petition, the petitioners had invited attention of the Honourable High Court to the decision of the Honourable High Court thereby quashing regional reservations provided in the admission broacher of the admission process for private Engineering Colleges, i.e. the judgmentin the cae of Association of the Managements of Unaided Engineering Colleges Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2006 (6) Bom.C.R. 792, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has specifically declared regional reservation provided for Engineering courses by declaring that in absence of any Statute thereby carving out exception to the provisions of Article 15 to provide regional quota, 70% reservation provided on regional criteria was unconstitutional and was beyond the authority of the committee formed for conducting Entrance Eligibility Test. The said decision is squarely applicable for the admission process for Medical and allied courses. The ::: Uploaded on - 19/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2020 03:44:12 ::: 29 wp 6460.20+ Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 03 rd May 2017 passed in WP No. 12567 of 2016 called upon the respondents to justify how the regional reservation provided for medical courses is sustainable in absence of any legislation.
Bombay High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S V Gangapurwala - Full Document

Nikita Santosh Lakhotiya vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 18 December, 2020

In the said petition, the petitioners had invited attention of the Honourable High Court to the decision of the Honourable High Court thereby quashing regional reservations provided in the admission broacher of the admission process for private Engineering Colleges, i.e. the judgmentin the cae of Association of the Managements of Unaided Engineering Colleges Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2006 (6) Bom.C.R. 792, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has specifically declared regional reservation provided for Engineering courses by declaring that in absence of any Statute thereby carving out exception to the provisions of Article 15 to provide regional quota, 70% reservation provided on regional criteria was unconstitutional and was beyond the authority of the committee formed for conducting Entrance Eligibility Test. The said decision is squarely applicable for the admission process for Medical and allied courses. The ::: Uploaded on - 19/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2020 03:44:47 ::: 29 wp 6460.20+ Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 03 rd May 2017 passed in WP No. 12567 of 2016 called upon the respondents to justify how the regional reservation provided for medical courses is sustainable in absence of any legislation.
Bombay High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S V Gangapurwala - Full Document

Sampat Baburav Gaikwad And Antoher vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anohter on 18 December, 2020

In the said petition, the petitioners had invited attention of the Honourable High Court to the decision of the Honourable High Court thereby quashing regional reservations provided in the admission broacher of the admission process for private Engineering Colleges, i.e. the judgmentin the cae of Association of the Managements of Unaided Engineering Colleges Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2006 (6) Bom.C.R. 792, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has specifically declared regional reservation provided for Engineering courses by declaring that in absence of any Statute thereby carving out exception to the provisions of Article 15 to provide regional quota, 70% reservation provided on regional criteria was unconstitutional and was beyond the authority of the committee formed for conducting Entrance Eligibility Test. The said decision is squarely applicable for the admission process for Medical and allied courses. The ::: Uploaded on - 19/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2020 03:43:47 ::: 29 wp 6460.20+ Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 03 rd May 2017 passed in WP No. 12567 of 2016 called upon the respondents to justify how the regional reservation provided for medical courses is sustainable in absence of any legislation.
Bombay High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S V Gangapurwala - Full Document

Gayateree Anil Deshmukh And Others vs Parag Sharad Chaudhari And Others on 18 December, 2020

In the said petition, the petitioners had invited attention of the Honourable High Court to the decision of the Honourable High Court thereby quashing regional reservations provided in the admission broacher of the admission process for private Engineering Colleges, i.e. the judgmentin the cae of Association of the Managements of Unaided Engineering Colleges Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2006 (6) Bom.C.R. 792, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has specifically declared regional reservation provided for Engineering courses by declaring that in absence of any Statute thereby carving out exception to the provisions of Article 15 to provide regional quota, 70% reservation provided on regional criteria was unconstitutional and was beyond the authority of the committee formed for conducting Entrance Eligibility Test. The said decision is squarely applicable for the admission process for Medical and allied courses. The ::: Uploaded on - 19/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2020 03:43:59 ::: 29 wp 6460.20+ Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 03 rd May 2017 passed in WP No. 12567 of 2016 called upon the respondents to justify how the regional reservation provided for medical courses is sustainable in absence of any legislation.
Bombay High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S V Gangapurwala - Full Document

Nirmayee Yogesh Chiplonkar Thr Father ... vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 18 December, 2020

In the said petition, the petitioners had invited attention of the Honourable High Court to the decision of the Honourable High Court thereby quashing regional reservations provided in the admission broacher of the admission process for private Engineering Colleges, i.e. the judgmentin the cae of Association of the Managements of Unaided Engineering Colleges Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2006 (6) Bom.C.R. 792, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has specifically declared regional reservation provided for Engineering courses by declaring that in absence of any Statute thereby carving out exception to the provisions of Article 15 to provide regional quota, 70% reservation provided on regional criteria was unconstitutional and was beyond the authority of the committee formed for conducting Entrance Eligibility Test. The said decision is squarely applicable for the admission process for Medical and allied courses. The ::: Uploaded on - 19/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2020 03:45:03 ::: 29 wp 6460.20+ Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 03 rd May 2017 passed in WP No. 12567 of 2016 called upon the respondents to justify how the regional reservation provided for medical courses is sustainable in absence of any legislation.
Bombay High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S V Gangapurwala - Full Document

Devanshi Dagli And Others vs The State Of Maharashtra And Another on 18 December, 2020

In the said petition, the petitioners had invited attention of the Honourable High Court to the decision of the Honourable High Court thereby quashing regional reservations provided in the admission broacher of the admission process for private Engineering Colleges, i.e. the judgmentin the cae of Association of the Managements of Unaided Engineering Colleges Vs. State of Maharashtra and others reported in 2006 (6) Bom.C.R. 792, wherein the Hon'ble High Court has specifically declared regional reservation provided for Engineering courses by declaring that in absence of any Statute thereby carving out exception to the provisions of Article 15 to provide regional quota, 70% reservation provided on regional criteria was unconstitutional and was beyond the authority of the committee formed for conducting Entrance Eligibility Test. The said decision is squarely applicable for the admission process for Medical and allied courses. The ::: Uploaded on - 19/12/2020 ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2020 03:44:55 ::: 29 wp 6460.20+ Hon'ble High Court, vide order dated 03 rd May 2017 passed in WP No. 12567 of 2016 called upon the respondents to justify how the regional reservation provided for medical courses is sustainable in absence of any legislation.
Bombay High Court Cites 23 - Cited by 0 - S V Gangapurwala - Full Document
1   2 Next