Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 7 of 7 (0.35 seconds)
Board Of Governors In Supersession Of ... vs Priyambada Sharma on 17 October, 2022 cites

Mridul Dhar(Minor)&Anr vs Uoi&Ors on 12 January, 2005

26. At the cost of repetition, it is observed and held that even after eight to nine rounds of counselling, out of 40,000 seats, 1456 seats have remained vacant, out of which approximately, more than 1100 seats are non­clinical seats, which every year remain vacant, of which the judicial notice has been taken by this Court in the case of Education Promotion Society for India (supra).”
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 464 - Full Document

Priya Gupta vs State Of Chhattisgarh & Ors on 8 May, 2012

20. That so far as the time schedule prescribed by the Medical Council of India in its Regulations, 2000 of which reference has been made for the academic year 2019­20 for admission to the post­graduate medical courses is concerned, it has to be strictly followed and that, in any circumstance, is not to be deviated. Last date for admissions to the post­graduate medical course will not be extended after 31st May and the schedule has been prescribed in compliance of the judgments of this Court of which reference has been made in Mridul Dhar(Minor) and Another(supra) followed by this Court in Priya Gupta (supra) and Ashish Ranjan and Others(supra) and this Court has consistently held that the schedule for admission to the post­graduate medical courses must be followed strictly leaving no discretion to any authority to permit admissions over the cut­off date under schedule for admission to post­graduate medical courses i.e. 31st May.
Supreme Court of India Cites 23 - Cited by 278 - S Kumar - Full Document

Dr. Ashish Ranjan And Ors. vs Union Of India And Ors. on 5 July, 2017

20. That so far as the time schedule prescribed by the Medical Council of India in its Regulations, 2000 of which reference has been made for the academic year 2019­20 for admission to the post­graduate medical courses is concerned, it has to be strictly followed and that, in any circumstance, is not to be deviated. Last date for admissions to the post­graduate medical course will not be extended after 31st May and the schedule has been prescribed in compliance of the judgments of this Court of which reference has been made in Mridul Dhar(Minor) and Another(supra) followed by this Court in Priya Gupta (supra) and Ashish Ranjan and Others(supra) and this Court has consistently held that the schedule for admission to the post­graduate medical courses must be followed strictly leaving no discretion to any authority to permit admissions over the cut­off date under schedule for admission to post­graduate medical courses i.e. 31st May.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 0 - Cited by 52 - Full Document

New Bank Of India Employees Union & Anr vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 March, 1996

22. This Court in Education Promotion Society for India and Another vs. Union of India and Others4 held as under:­ “6. In this case the petitioners want a general extension of time not on account of any particular difficulty faced by any individual college or university but generally on the ground that a large number of seats for the PG courses are lying vacant. It is stated that more than 1000 seats are lying vacant. In the affidavit filed by the UoI it is mentioned that as far as deemed universities are concerned there are 603 seats lying vacant. However, it is important to note that out of 603 seats lying vacant only 31 are in clinical subjects and the vast majority (572) that is almost 95% of the seats are lying vacant in non­clinical subjects. There is no material on record to show as to what is the situation with regard to the remaining 400­500 seats. This Court however can take judicial notice of the fact that every year large number of non­ clinical seats remain vacant because many graduate doctors do not want to do postgraduation in non­clinical subjects. Merely because the seats are lying vacant, in our view, is not a ground to grant extension of time and grant further opportunity to fill up vacant seats. The schedule must be followed. If we permit violation of schedule and grant extension, we shall be opening a pandora's box and the whole purpose of fixing a time schedule and laying down a regime which strictly adheres to time schedule will be defeated.” 4 (2019) 7 SCC 38
Supreme Court of India Cites 14 - Cited by 53 - K Ramaswamy - Full Document

Dr. Atharv Tungatkar vs The Medical Consulting Committee on 10 June, 2022

23. Further, this Court in Dr. Astha Goel and Others vs. Medical Counselling Committee and Others5 held as under:­ “23. Applying the law laid down by this Court in the aforesaid two decisions to the facts of the case on hand and when the Medical Counselling Committee and the Union of India have to adhere to the time schedule for completing the admission process and when the current admission of NEET­PG­2021 is already behind time schedule and ever after conducting eight to nine rounds of counselling, still some seats, which are mainly non­ clinical courses seats have remained vacant and thereafter when a conscious decision is taken by the Union Government/the Medical Counselling Committee, not to conduct a further Special Stray Round of counselling, it cannot be said that the same is arbitrary. The decision of the Union Government and the Medical Counselling Committee not to have Special Stray Round of counselling is in the interest of Medical Education and Public Health. There cannot be any compromise with the merits and/or quality of Medical Education, which may ultimately affect the Public Health.
Supreme Court of India Cites 6 - Cited by 17 - M R Shah - Full Document

Medical Council Of India vs Ritwik on 26 July, 2021

25. The feeble submission made by the respondents’ counsel that a sympathetic view may be taken on the premise that they have been allowed to continue in their respective post­graduate medical courses for quite some time or few of them have completed the course in the interregnum despite the order of stay granted by this Court and the reliance placed on the judgment of this Court in Medical Council of India vs. Ritwik & Others 6, in our view, may not be of any assistance for the reason that it was a case where the student was selected in the counselling in the first year MBBS course but was not granted admission due to his inability to pay the fee before the last date i.e. 31st August, 2018 and he was allowed to continue and pursue the course by interim order passed by this Court. In the given peculiar facts and circumstances, his admission was approved under the order of this Court. As far as the cases of present respondents are concerned, they have participated in the second round of counselling but failed to get any 6 2021 SCC OnLine SC 3280 16 seat in the post­graduate medical course because of lower rank in order of merit and by interim orders passed by the High Court, provisional admissions were granted to them ignoring the principle of merit which cannot be countenanced by this Court.
Supreme Court - Daily Orders Cites 2 - Cited by 2 - Full Document
1