Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.30 seconds)

Indra Sawhney Etc. Etc vs Union Of India And Others, Etc. Etc. on 16 November, 1992

Nonetheless, the principles discussed in T. Devadasan (supra) and Indra Sawhney (supra) would be relevant, since, the only question to be addressed is whether reservation in admissions is being provided or not. Indisputably, the provision for "carry forward" is for the purposes of providing reservation in admissions. The reservations in admissions can be made in different ways and the point roster system which is based on carry forward of reservation quota (both negative and positive) is one such system of providing allocation of seats for the purposes of reservation. We find no principle under which this system could, per se, be considered as impermissible or unconstitutional.
Supreme Court of India Cites 136 - Cited by 1429 - B P Reddy - Full Document

M. R. Balaji And Others vs State Of Mysore on 28 September, 1962

The Court applied the principle enunciated by the Supreme Court in an earlier decision in M.R. Balaji v. State of Mysore: AIR 1963 SC 649, wherein it was held that reservation exceeding 50% of the seats available would be unconstitutional. Justice LPA Nos.458/2013 & 506/2013 Page 17 of 28 Subba Rao did not agree with this view and in his dissenting opinion expressed as under:
Supreme Court of India Cites 28 - Cited by 268 - P B Gajendragadkar - Full Document

T.Devadasan vs The Union Of India And Another on 29 August, 1963

Nonetheless, the principles discussed in T. Devadasan (supra) and Indra Sawhney (supra) would be relevant, since, the only question to be addressed is whether reservation in admissions is being provided or not. Indisputably, the provision for "carry forward" is for the purposes of providing reservation in admissions. The reservations in admissions can be made in different ways and the point roster system which is based on carry forward of reservation quota (both negative and positive) is one such system of providing allocation of seats for the purposes of reservation. We find no principle under which this system could, per se, be considered as impermissible or unconstitutional.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 191 - J R Mudholkar - Full Document
1   2 Next