Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.32 seconds)
Shefali Shukla vs University Of Delhi & Anr on 2 February, 2021 cites

Rajeev Kumar Gupta & Ors vs Union Of India & Ors on 30 June, 2016

5. Mr. Chhibber submits that the petitioner cannot be permitted to take admission at this stage, when the classes for the LL.M. programme have already commenced. He cites the judgment of the Division Bench in W.P.(C) 1330/2021 Page 2 of 4 Dr. Rajeev Kumar vs. Union of India & Ors. [W.P.(C)2275/2010, decided on 01.08.2014], which was rendered in the context of admission to Indian Institutes of Technology ("IITs"). The Division Bench, in the said judgment, held as follows:
Supreme Court of India Cites 19 - Cited by 104 - Full Document

Ms. Neelu Arora And Anr. vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Ors. on 24 January, 2003

Similarly, in Neelu Arora Vs. Union of India (2003) 3 SCC 366 it was held that when a detailed scheme has been framed and the manner in which it has to be worked out is indicated therein, merely because a certain number of seats are not filled up, is not a reason enough for adopting one more round of counselling, if there is no scope therefor under the scheme. It was held to be not advisable to go on altering the scheme as and when seats are found vacant."
Supreme Court of India Cites 2 - Cited by 78 - Full Document
1