Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.27 seconds)
Madhurima Biswas & Ors vs The State Of West Bengal & Ors on 18 December, 2018 cites

Mulani Akash Jaysukhbhai & 26 vs Union Of India & 22....Opponent(S) on 18 March, 2016

Question before Court is whether State Government must take over responsibility of students already admitted in the College, some of whom are before Court. To that, answer must be that State is obliged to do so as undertaken by it on issuance of essentiality certificate to the College by competent authority. How it is to be done is a matter for State in administering medical education. This Court can only say Mulani Akash Jaysukhbhai (supra) may be of some instruction regarding creation of temporary vacant seats in several colleges for distribution of students as displaced from 16 respondent-college on failure to provide infrastructure for them to pursue course study.
Gujarat High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 1 - R S Reddy - Full Document

Dr.Murari Prasad Sarangi vs Ministry Of Health And Family Welfare on 30 October, 2012

Mr. Mitra submits, there is no dispute on facts regarding fresh admissions in respondent-college stopped by Central Government. Contingency provided on happening, State Government is to take over responsibility of students already admitted in the college. Though State had caused instructions to be issued regarding permission being granted by MCI and Central Government, MCI has filed affidavit to contend against grant of such permission alleging his clients are seeking migration. Union of India has not filed affidavit but appears to have adopted contention of MCI that his clients are seeking migration. He submits, this is a case being thrust upon petitioners. Petitioners' case is similar to that which arose before High Court of Judicature at Madras and dealt with by a learned Single Judge by judgement dated 22nd December, 2017 in, inter alia, W.P. 25215 of 2017 (Hari Prasad and others Vs. The Health Secretary, Ministry of health and Family Welfare and others). He relies particularly on paragraphs 2, 3, 6, 7, 36, 37 and 40 of the judgement. He demonstrates, second year students in a Medical College situate in Tamil Nadu were faced with similar situation as his clients. On facts before the Court, by 7 the judgment it gave directions in paragraph 37 as are reproduced below:
Central Information Commission Cites 2 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1