Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 10 (0.50 seconds)
Union Of India vs Mahendra Singh on 25 July, 2022 cites

Municipal Corporation Of Greater ... vs Abhilash Lal on 15 November, 2019

17. Similarly, this Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) v. Abhilash Lal & Ors.12 and OPTO Circuit India Limited v. Axis Bank & Ors.13 has followed the said principle. Since the advertisement contemplated the manner of filling up of the application form and also the attempting of the answer sheets, it has to be done in the manner so prescribed. Therefore, the reasoning given by the Division Bench of the High Court that on account of lapse of time, the writ petitioner might have attempted the answer sheet in a different language is not justified as the use of different language itself disentitles the writ petitioner from any indulgence in exercise of the power of judicial review.
Supreme Court of India Cites 46 - Cited by 141 - S R Bhat - Full Document

The State Of Tamil Nadu vs G. Hemalathaa on 28 August, 2019

10. Ms. Madhavi Divan, learned ASG has argued that the use of different language in the application form than what is used in the OMR sheet by itself entails rejection of the candidature. Ms. Divan has referred to a judgment reported as State of Tamil Nadu & Ors. v. G. Hemalathaa & Anr.5. On the other hand, Mr. Prashant Bhushan, learned counsel for the writ petitioner argued that use of a different language is only an irregularity, though it is admitted that the purpose of using the same language is to avoid impersonation and to ascertain the genuineness of the candidate.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 87 - L N Rao - Full Document

Opto Circuit India Ltd. vs Axis Bank on 3 February, 2021

17. Similarly, this Court in Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai (MCGM) v. Abhilash Lal & Ors.12 and OPTO Circuit India Limited v. Axis Bank & Ors.13 has followed the said principle. Since the advertisement contemplated the manner of filling up of the application form and also the attempting of the answer sheets, it has to be done in the manner so prescribed. Therefore, the reasoning given by the Division Bench of the High Court that on account of lapse of time, the writ petitioner might have attempted the answer sheet in a different language is not justified as the use of different language itself disentitles the writ petitioner from any indulgence in exercise of the power of judicial review.
Supreme Court of India Cites 22 - Cited by 112 - A S Bopanna - Full Document
1