Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 8 of 8 (0.60 seconds)

Sh Arman Sindhu vs Union Of India & Ors. on 18 August, 2021

5.1. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr.Krutik Parikh submitted that the issue arising in these petitions are now covered by the judgments of the Madras High Court as well as the Delhi High Court. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Madras High Court dated 9th August, 2021 in Writ Petition No.16526 of 2021 and other allied matters in case of GA Vishwajeet Vs. Union of India and Others as well as the decision of the Delhi High Court dated 18th August, 2021 in Writ Petition No.8429 of 2021 in case of SH ARMAN SINDHU Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Delhi High Court Cites 11 - Cited by 2 - P Jalan - Full Document

Dolly Chhanda vs Chairman, Jee & Ors on 5 October, 2004

14. It is also relevant to note that the appellant has not chosen to challenge the time limits prescribed and fixed in the Information Bulletin. In any event, she has not made out any case to demonstrate that the procedure prescribed in the Information Bulletin is violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India and suffers from the vice of arbitrariness. Knowing that she was ineligible to get admission in terms of the relevant Rules and Regulations, the appellant still proceeded to take part in Page 8 of 10 Downloaded on : Sun Jan 16 12:50:04 IST 2022 C/SCA/11773/2021 ORDER DATED: 07/09/2021 the counseling conducted for seats reserved under All India quota and also in the counselling conducted by the State of Uttar Pradesh for filling up the seats which are reserved for State quota." As noted above, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the said judgment of the Division Bench."
Supreme Court of India Cites 1 - Cited by 362 - Full Document

Ga Vishwajeet vs Union Of India on 9 August, 2021

5.1. On the other hand, learned advocate Mr.Krutik Parikh submitted that the issue arising in these petitions are now covered by the judgments of the Madras High Court as well as the Delhi High Court. Reliance was placed on the decision of the Madras High Court dated 9th August, 2021 in Writ Petition No.16526 of 2021 and other allied matters in case of GA Vishwajeet Vs. Union of India and Others as well as the decision of the Delhi High Court dated 18th August, 2021 in Writ Petition No.8429 of 2021 in case of SH ARMAN SINDHU Vs. Union of India and Ors.
Madras High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 3 - N A Venkatesh - Full Document

Ojasvini Agrawal vs Union Of India on 22 June, 2020

5.2. Relying upon the aforesaid decisions, it was submitted that the Delhi High Court has referred to the decision of the Madras High Court and after considering the arguments of both the sides dismissed the petition. It was submitted that the Delhi High Court has also considered the decision in case of Ojasvini Agrawal Vs. Union of India decided on 13th May, 2020 in Writ Petition No.3054 of 2020 of the Delhi High Court which was affirmed by the Division Bench vide judgment dated 27th May, 2020 in Letters Patent Appeal No.147 of 2020 and has held as under :
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1