Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 12 (0.36 seconds)

Avinash Mehrotra vs Union Of India & Ors on 13 April, 2009

44. We also do not find any merit in the plea taken by the petitioners that the safety norms engrafted in the NBC, 2016 would not be applicable to schools that were in existence prior to the ruling of the Supreme Court in the case of Avinash Mehrotra (supra). The petitioners were all along aware of the mandatory requirement of obtaining a fire NOC and had on their own given an undertaking to furnish one to the authorities. When the petitioners had voluntarily given an undertaking to the respondent No.2/TSBIE that if they do not obtain a fire NOC in respect of the building from where the junior college was operating, they would shift the students to a fire compliant building, they must be firmly held to the said undertaking. They cannot be permitted to renege by offering frivolous excuses to wriggle out of the stipulations of law. In any event, the petitioners were duly accommodated by the respondent No.2/TSBIE. While rejecting their application for affiliation and ordering closure of the colleges, respondent No.2/TSBIE had directed the petitioners to shift the students to another suitable building for the next academic year so as not to jeopardise the career of the students studying in the said colleges.
Supreme Court of India Cites 15 - Cited by 75 - D Bhandari - Full Document
1   2 Next