Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.75 seconds)
State Of Tamil Nadu And Anr vs S.V. Bratheep (Minor) And Ors on 16 March, 2004 cites

State Of Tamil Nadu & Anr. Etc. Etc vs Adhiyaman Educational & Research ... on 24 March, 1995

It is no doubt true as noticed by this Court in Adhiyaman's case that there may be situations when a large number of seats may fall vacant on account of the higher standards fixed. The standards fixed should always be realistic which are attainable and are within the reach of the candidates. It cannot be said that the prescriptions by the State Government in addition to those of AICTE in the present case are such which are not attainable or which are not within the reach of the candidates who seek admission for engineering colleges. It is not very high percentage of marks that has been prescribed as minimum of 60% downwards, but definitely higher than the mere pass marks.
Supreme Court of India Cites 37 - Cited by 491 - P B Sawant - Full Document

Preeti Srivastava (Dr.)& Anr vs State Of Madhya Pradesh & Ors on 10 August, 1999

The scope of the relative entries in the Seventh Schedule to the Constitution have to be understood in the manner as stated in the Dr. Preeti Srivastava's case and, therefore, we need not further elaborate in this case or consider arguments to the contrary such as application of occupied theory no power could be exercised under Entry 25 of List III as they would not arise for consideration.
Supreme Court of India Cites 61 - Cited by 421 - S B Majmudar - Full Document

Islamic Academy Of Education And ... vs State Of Karnataka And Others on 14 August, 2003

The argument advanced on behalf of the respondents that these matters are indeed governed by the decision in Islamic Academy of Education and Anr. v. State of Karnataka and Ors., [2003] 6 SCC 697, and T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka, [2002] 8 SCC 481. In fact this Court did not consider the question that has arisen for our consideration in the present case but was dealing with entirely different issue in relation to fee structure of minority and non-minority educational institutions and whether private unaided professional colleges are entitled to fill their seats to the full extent by their own method of admission. That is not the issue before us at all.
Supreme Court of India Cites 68 - Cited by 767 - V N Khare - Full Document

T.M.A.Pai Foundation & Ors vs State Of Karnataka & Ors on 31 October, 2002

The argument advanced on behalf of the respondents that these matters are indeed governed by the decision in Islamic Academy of Education and Anr. v. State of Karnataka and Ors., [2003] 6 SCC 697, and T.M.A. Pai Foundation v. State of Karnataka, [2002] 8 SCC 481. In fact this Court did not consider the question that has arisen for our consideration in the present case but was dealing with entirely different issue in relation to fee structure of minority and non-minority educational institutions and whether private unaided professional colleges are entitled to fill their seats to the full extent by their own method of admission. That is not the issue before us at all.
Supreme Court of India Cites 123 - Cited by 914 - Full Document
1