Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 2 of 2 (0.25 seconds)
Matsya Udyog Sahakari Samiti Maryadit vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 25 October, 2017 cites

Bihar School Examination Board vs Subhas Chandra Sinha, & Ors on 10 March, 1970

This Court rejected the plea of breach of rules of natural justice, as follows: (Subhas Chandra case, SCC p. 652, para 13) 6 WP No.5261 of 2016 "13. This is not a case of any particular individual who is being charged with adoption of unfair means but of the conduct of all the examinees or at least a vast majority of them at a particular centre. If it is not a question of charging any one individually with unfair means but to condemn the examination as ineffective for the purpose it was held. Must the Board give an opportunity to all the candidates to represent their cases? We think not. It was not necessary for the Board to give an opportunity to the candidates if the examinations as a whole were being cancelled. The Board had not charged any one with unfair means so that he could claim to defend himself. The examination was vitiated by adoption of unfair means on a mass scale. In these circumstances it would be wrong to insist that the Board must hold a detailed inquiry into the matter and examine each individual case to satisfy itself which of the candidates had not adopted unfair means. The examination as a whole had to go."
Supreme Court of India Cites 5 - Cited by 216 - M Hidayatullah - Full Document

Union Of India vs Anand Kumar Pandey on 18 July, 1994

31. We may also make a reference here to the observations made by this Court in Union of India v. Anand Kumar Pandey. In this case, the Railway Recruitment Board, Patna invited applications for selection and recruitment of various posts of Non- technical Popular categories in the Eastern Railway. The selection was to be made on the basis of a written examination followed by a viva voce test. A large number of candidates appeared in the written test from various centres in the city of Katihar. The respondents in the appeal had appeared in the written examination and duly qualified. They had also qualified in the viva voce 7 WP No.5261 of 2016 test and their names were included in the panel of selected candidates, which was published. On a complaint of mass copying at Centre No. 115, the Railway Authorities conducted an enquiry and found the complaint to be correct. The Railway Authorities decided to subject the 35 candidates, who had qualified the written test from Centre No. 115, to a fresh examination. CAT set aside this decision of the Railway Authorities as being violative of rules of natural justice.
Supreme Court of India Cites 0 - Cited by 57 - K Singh - Full Document
1