Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 15 (0.83 seconds)
Nipun Sharma vs Post Graduate Institute Of Medical ... on 14 August, 2020 cites

Raj Singh vs The Maharshi Dayanand University And ... on 31 January, 1994

In Raj Singh v. Maharshi Dayanand University, 1994 (4) R.S.J. 289 another Full Bench of this Court took the view that a candidate will have to be taken to be bound by the information supplied in the admission form and cannot be allowed to take a stand that suits him at a given time. The Full Bench approved the view expressed in earlier Full Bench that eligibility for admission to a course has to be seen according to the prospectus issued before the Entrance Examination and that the admission has to be made on the basis of instructions given in the prospectus, having the force of law.
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 52 - Full Document

Sachin Gaur vs Punjab University, Patiala And Others on 12 October, 1995

Again Full Bench of this Court in Sachin Gaur v. Punjab University, 1996 (1) RSJ 1 : (AIR 1996 Punj & Har 109) took the view that there has to be a cut off date provided for admission and the same cannot be changed afterwards. These views expressed by earlier Full Benches have been followed in CWP No. 14 of 21 ::: Downloaded on - 06-09-2020 07:58:42 ::: CWP-10684-2020(O&M) [15] 6756 of 1996 by the three of us constituting another Full Bench. Thus, it is settled law that the provisions contained in the information brochure for the Common Entrance Test 1997 have the force of law and have to be strictly complied with. No modification can be made by the court in exercise of powers under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Whenever a notification calling for applications, fixes date and time within which applications are to be received whether sent through post or by any other mode that time schedule has to be complied with in letter and spirit. If the application has not reached the co-ordinator or the competent authority as the case may be the same cannot be considered as having been filed in terms of the provisions contained in the prospectus or Information Brochure. Applications filed in violation of the terms of the brochure have only to be rejected."
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 4 - Cited by 51 - S P Kurdukar - Full Document

Rahul Prabhakar vs Punjab Technical University And Ors. on 16 May, 1997

10. Subsequently, another Full Bench of this Court in the case of Rahul Prabhakar v. Punjab Technical University, Jalandhar, 1997 (3) RSJ 475 : (AIR 1998 Punj & Har 18) recapitulated the entire law on the subject. The Full Bench was considering the same brochure for the previous year of the Punjab Technical University. The Court held as under:--
Punjab-Haryana High Court Cites 27 - Cited by 89 - T H Chalapathi - Full Document

Nipun Jain & Others vs State Of H.P & Others.Rt on 5 September, 2016

8. The petitioner had initially not applied with the State of Himachal Pradesh for sponsorship. After declaration of the result by the respondent-institution, the petitioner approached the Hon'ble High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla vide CWP No.2235 of 2020 titled as 'Dr. Nipun Sharma Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others' with the prayer that the respondents therein may be directed to issue NOC and Sponsorship Certificate in favour of the petitioner for pursuing Super Specialty Course in Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery from PGIMER, Chandigarh. The Himachal High Court vide order dated 08.07.2020 directed the State of Himachal Pradesh to relieve the petitioner, if not already relieved, for enabling him to complete the super specialty course (M.Ch), Plastic Surgery and Reconstructive Surgery from PGI, Chandigarh.
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 1 - S Thakur - Full Document
1   2 Next