Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 29 (0.27 seconds)

V.N. Sunanda Reddy & Ors vs State Of Andhra Pradesh & Ors on 25 January, 1995

It is also urged by the learned counsel that the medium of education can never be treated as qualification and therefore it cannot be a ground to deprive the appellants of their right to employment. Relying upon STATE OF MADRAS v. SMT. CHAMPAKAM DORAI RAJAN & ANOTHER3, STATE OF BOMBAY v. BOMBAY EDUCATONAL SOCIETY4, ST. STEPHENS COLLEGE v. UNIVERSITY OF DELHI5, V.N. SUNANDA REDDY & OTHERS v. STATE OF A.P.6 and GUJARAT UNIVERSITY & ANOTHER v. SHRI KRISHNA RANGANATH MUDHOLKAR & OTHERS7, the learned counsel for the appellants vehemently contended that the impugned condition that the candidates must have studied in English medium in two/three levels is violative of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Articles 14, 16 (2) and 29 (2) of the Constitution of India. Contentions on behalf of the respondents:
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 24 - S B Majmudar - Full Document

The Gujarat University, Ahmedabad vs Krishna Ranganath Mudholkar And Others on 21 February, 1962

Consequent to the said decision, the NCTE Act, 1993 has been amended by Act 18 of 2011 thereby extending the applicability of the NCTE Act to schools and the minimum qualifications for appointment of school teachers also. Under the Act 18 of 2011 not only the long title of the NCTE Act, 1993 was amended, but certain new provisions like Section 2 (ka) which defines the expression "school" and Section 12A empowering the NCTE to make regulations to determine the qualifications of persons for being recruited as teachers in schools other than Teacher Training Institutions have been inserted.
Supreme Court of India Cites 34 - Cited by 214 - J C Shah - Full Document

State Of U.P.& Ors vs Bhupendra Nath Tripathi & Ors on 29 October, 2010

Even otherwise as held by the Apex Court in STATE OF U.P. v. BHUPENDRA NATH TRIPATHI8 and VISVESWARAIAH TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY v. KRISHNENDU HALDER9, the State in its discretion is entitled to prescribe additional qualifications so long as the qualifications so prescribed are not lower than those prescribed by NCTE. Following the above said decisions the learned single Judge upheld the impugned condition in the notification dated 06.02.2012.
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 55 - B S Reddy - Full Document

Visweswaraiah Technological Univ.& ... vs Krishnendu Halder & Ors on 18 February, 2011

Even otherwise as held by the Apex Court in STATE OF U.P. v. BHUPENDRA NATH TRIPATHI8 and VISVESWARAIAH TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY v. KRISHNENDU HALDER9, the State in its discretion is entitled to prescribe additional qualifications so long as the qualifications so prescribed are not lower than those prescribed by NCTE. Following the above said decisions the learned single Judge upheld the impugned condition in the notification dated 06.02.2012.
Supreme Court of India Cites 7 - Cited by 145 - R V Raveendran - Full Document

State Of Mysore & Anr vs P. Narasing Rao on 31 August, 1967

In other words, Article 16 is only an instance of the application of the general rule of equality laid down in Article 14 and it should be construed as such. Hence, there is no denial of equality of opportunity unless the person who complains of discrimination is equally situated with the person or persons who are alleged to have been favoured; Article l6 (l) does not bar a reasonable classification of employees or reasonable tests for their selection. It is true that the selective test adopted by the Government for making two different classes will be violative of Articles 14 and l6 if there is no relevant connection between the test prescribed and the interest of public service. In other words, there must be a reasonable relation of the prescribed test to the suitability of the candidate for the post or for employment to public service as such. The provisions of Article 14 or Article 16 do not exclude the laying down of selective tests, nor do they preclude the Government from laying down qualifications for the post in question. Such qualifications need not be only technical but they can also be general qualifications relating to the suitability of the candidate for public service as such."
Supreme Court of India Cites 8 - Cited by 215 - V Ramaswami - Full Document
1   2 3 Next