Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 6 of 6 (0.23 seconds)Article 14 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
Maharashtra State Board Of Secondary ... vs Paritosh Bhupesh Kumar Sheth Etc on 17 July, 1984
The delay should be avoided because the delay in the finalisation of the list would, of necessity, delay the commencement of the studies in a professional course. Moreso, when we know of no accepted principle of natural justice which may necessitate the granting of the right to ask for re-evaluation to the examinees, who are dissatisfied with the result of the examination. To borrow the words of the Supreme Court in Maharashtra State Board of Secondary and Higher Secondary Education v. Paritosh Bhupesh Kurmarsheth etc. etc., (AIR 1984 SC 1543), where it said (in paragraph 12) that (at page SC 1549; AIR 1984) :--
Kanpur University And Others vs Samir Gupta And Others on 27 September, 1983
18. We feel that fairness demands that the key answers should also be published along-with the result of the Test. If any answer is clearly demonstrated to be wrong in the sense that no reasonable body of men well versed in the particular subject would regard it as correct, appropriate measures in that respect should be taken by the University. If the attention of the University is drawn to a defect of this nature in a key answer or to any ambiguity to the question set in the examina-tion, prompt and timely decision must be taken by the University to declare that the suspected question will be excluded from the paper and no marks assigned to it, as was said by the Supreme Court in Kanpur University's case.
M. R. Balaji And Others vs State Of Mysore on 28 September, 1962
23. A constitution Bench of the Supreme Court has occasion to deal with the provisions of Article 15(4) in M. R. Balaji v. The State of Mysore (AIR 1963 SC 649). It said (in paragraph 21) that (at page SC 658; AIR 1963) :--
State Of Uttar Pradesh vs Pradip Tandon & Ors on 19 November, 1974
In a later judgment in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Pradip Tandon (AIR 1975 SC 563), the Supreme Court was examining the question of constitutional validity of reservation in favour of the candidates from rural areas, the hill and Uttrakhand areas (in the State of Uttar Pradesh) for admision of students to Medical Colleges in the State. It referred to several of its earlier decisions. Speaking about social backwardness, it said (in paragraphs 18 and 19) that:--
1