Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.25 seconds)
Shahnaz Fatma vs The Bihar State Bar Council on 5 July, 2024 cites

Sarita Devi vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 14 September, 2017

There was no such requirement in the advertisement that the candidate who was a graduate, as well as a B. Ed. from recognized institutes, must also have matriculation or equivalent as specifically recognized by the appellants. This Court also finds that the judgment relied upon by the Patna High Court CWJC No.4448 of 2022 dt.05-07-2024 19/22 appellants passed by Hon'ble Patna High Court dated 14.02.2019 (Sangita Devi versus the State of Bihar & Ors.) does not apply to the present case. In the said case the Principal Secretary, Human Resources Department, State of Bihar had issued a letter no.312 dated 25.08.2008 that Vidya Vinodini (matriculation) from Prayag Mahila Vidyapeeth, Allahabad was not recognized which was the basis of cancellation of appointment of Anganbari Sevika and accordingly, the writ petitioner of that case did not satisfy the eligibility criteria in terms of the advertisement. In the present case, the respondent no.1 satisfies all the requirements and qualifications mentioned in the advertisement and it is also not in dispute that the respondent no.1 has passed the required competitive examination for induction in service. In such circumstances, the candidature of the respondent no. 1 cannot be canceled by referring to her past educational qualification which itself was the base for her higher qualifications duly recognized as per the requirement of the advertisement involved in the present case. This Court is of the considered view that once the terms and conditions of the Patna High Court CWJC No.4448 of 2022 dt.05-07-2024 20/22 advertisement are satisfied, the candidature of a candidate cannot be rejected on grounds other than the requirements in terms of the advertisement."
Patna High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - J Saran - Full Document

Sangeeta Devi & Ors vs The State Of Bihar & Ors on 12 February, 2016

22. Learned counsel for the Amicus Curiae submits that the equivalence of Vidya Vinodini certificate determined in the judgment of Sanjeeta Devi vs. The State of Bihar and Ors. (supra) was specifically for the appointment to the post of Anganbari Sevika. The aforesaid decision has nothing Patna High Court CWJC No.4448 of 2022 dt.05-07-2024 14/22 to do with the enrollment of an applicant as an Advocate on the rolls of the Bihar State Bar Council.
Patna High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 1 - K K Mandal - Full Document

Shri Krishan vs The Kurukshetra University, ... on 17 November, 1975

23. Learned Amicus Curiae further submits that the recognition of the Vidya Vinodini Certificate by the Bihar Intermediate Council fully fortifies the contention in favour of the petitioner and that therefore, the respondent did not have any jurisdiction to take a contrary view. The petitioner undertook multiple levels of higher education on the strength, validity and recognition of the said Vidya Vinodini certificate. He has placed reliance on a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Shri Krishan vs. The Kurukshetra University reported as AIR 1976 SC 376 and has submitted that before issuing the admission card to a student to appear in the Examination, it was the duty of the University authorities to scrutinize the papers; and equally it was the duty of the Head of the Department before submitting the form to the university to see that it complied with Patna High Court CWJC No.4448 of 2022 dt.05-07-2024 15/22 all requirements; and if they did not take care to scrutinize the papers, the candidature for the examinations cannot be cancelled subsequently on the ground of non-fulfilment of requirements.
Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 219 - S M Ali - Full Document

Sangita Devi vs The State Of Bihar And Ors on 14 February, 2019

10. The reliance placed by the respondents on Patna High Court CWJC No.4448 of 2022 dt.05-07-2024 8/22 judgment and order dated 14.02.2019 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in L.P.A. 455 of 2018 (Sangita Devi v. State & Ors.) is misplaced since the same pertains to selection for the post of Anganbari Sevika and not for enrollment with a professional statutory body such as the Bar Council. Moreover, till date the respondents particularly the Bar Council of India has not issued any notification, order or direction to the effect that Vidya Vinodini certificate cannot be considered for admission to the LL.B. course.
Patna High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 0 - A Mishra - Full Document
1