Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (6.31 seconds)
Documents citing Narendra Pratap Singh And Ors. vs Director General Of Police, U.P. And ... on 22 May, 2002

Niranjan Singh And Ors. vs State Of U.P. And Ors. on 7 December, 2004

16. Sri Ashok Khare further submits that the candidates belonging to reserved category of Other Backward Classes category are aggrieved inasmuch as the Other Backward Classes candidates securing more marks than the last candidates selected, were not treated as selected under the general category, but still they have been shown as selected under reserved category of Other Backward Classes. The first select list specified cut off marks of 316.24 for Male (General/Arts) and 302.6 for Male (OBC/Arts). The O.B.C. and other reserved categories securing more marks than 316.24 were included in general category. The second list, however, published on 25.8.2004 specified 309.9 marks for Male (General/Arts) and 300.19 for Male (OBC/Arts). Sri Khare submits that all the OBC candidates, who have secured marks between 309.9 and 316.24 are candidates who have secured more marks than the last candidate selected under the general category and are liable to be included in the select list of general category. He has relied upon Section 3 (6) of U.P. Act No. 4 of 1994 and the judgments in R.K. Sabbarwal v. State of Rajasthan, 1995 (2) SCC 745 and Narendra Pratap Singh v. Director General, 2002 (3) ESC 339 (All).
Allahabad High Court Cites 34 - Cited by 7 - S Ambwani - Full Document

Shiv Prakash Yadav Son Of Ram Nath, ... vs The State Of U.P. Through The Principal ... on 29 October, 2007

8. The Special Appeal No. 1411 of 2005 has been filed by the State of U.P. and others challenging judgment dated 5.10.2005 passed by Hon'ble Single Judge in writ petition No. 1187 of 2002 Shiv Prakash Yadav and Ors. v. State of U.P. and Ors. on the ground that the finding recorded by the Hon'ble Single Judge with respect to Section 3(6) of 1994 Act is incorrect and even otherwise contrary to another Single Judge Judgment of this Court in Narendra Pratap Singh and Ors. v. Director General of Police, U.P. and Ors. reported in 2002 (3) UPLBEC 2304. It is thus prayed that the judgment of the Hon'ble Single Judge dated 5.10.2005 be set aside.
Allahabad High Court Cites 5 - Cited by 54 - Full Document

Abhishek Kumar Singh & 3 Ors. vs State Of U.P. Through Prin. Secy. Deptt. ... on 24 August, 2016

In paragraph 15 of the judgment in Narendra Pratap Singh (supra) the Coordinate Bench of this Court opined that from the Scheme of the Act 1994 it does not appear that reserve category candidates who had been granted relaxation or concession in age or fee are not entitled for the benefit provided in sub section 6 of Section 3 of the Act, 1994. By grant of relaxation and concession to reserve category candidate the general category candidates are not prejudiced in any manner in competing with such reserve category candidates. The Court opined that standard of selection of all category was the same, hence, benefit of Section 3, sub-section (6) cannot be denied to reserve category candidates. If different standard, had been applied to different categories then, of-course, they would not be entitled to the said benefit.
Allahabad High Court Cites 49 - Cited by 18 - R Roy - Full Document

Guru Prasad Yadav And 4 Others vs State Of U.P. And Another on 1 February, 2023

This application u/s 482 Cr.P.C. has been preferred seeking the quashing of entire proceeding in Criminal Complaint Case No.635 of 2014 (Narendra Singh and others vs. State of U.P.), as well as summoning order dated 26.9.2019 passed by the Judicial Magistrate-3, Varanasi, under Sections 323, 504, 506, 379 I.P.C., P.S.-Chaubeypur, District-Varanasi.
Allahabad High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 0 - R Chaturvedi - Full Document
1   2 Next