Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.29 seconds)
Kumari Madhuri Patil vs Addl. Commissioner on 2 September, 1994 cites

Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao vs Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College And Ors on 2 May, 1990

In Marri Chandra Shekhar Rao v. Dean, Seth G.S. Medical College2, this Court declared that subject to the law made by Parliament under sub-section (2) of Section 342, the tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within tribes or tribal communities specified by the President by a public notification shall be final for the purpose of the Constitution. They are the tribes in relation to that State or Union Territory and that any tribe or tribes or tribal communities or parts of or groups within such tribe or tribal communities, not specified therein in relation to that State, shall not be Scheduled Tribes for the purpose of the Constitution. The father of one Chandra Shekhar Rao who hailed from Tenali in Guntur District of Andhra Pradesh is a Settibalija by caste which is recognised as a backward class. His father obtained a certificate from the Tahsildar, Tenali that he belonged to Scheduled Tribe and had got an appointment in a public undertaking of Bombay. On the basis of social status certificate obtained by his father and entries in service record of his father, he applied for admission into medical 2 (1990) 3 SCC 130: (1990) 14 ATC 671 250 college as Scheduled Tribe. When he was not admitted, he filed the writ petition in this Court under Article 32 seeking a declaration that Settibalija though was not declared to be Scheduled Tribe in Maharashtra it was a Scheduled Tribe for the purpose of the Constitution and that he was entitled to the admission into the medical college on the basis of his social status as a Scheduled Tribe. This Court did not uphold the contention. This Court held that the declaration by the President by a public notification in relation to a State in consultation with the Governor of that State is conclusive and court cannot give such a declaration.
Supreme Court of India Cites 24 - Cited by 276 - S Mukharji - Full Document

Subhash Ganpatrao Kabade vs State Of Maharashtra And Ors. on 19 June, 1986

The Committee, the Additional Commissioner and the High Court had not appreciated the evidence in proper perspective before declining to confirm the social status of the appellants as Scheduled Tribes and the High Court ought to have gone into these aspects as was done in Subhash Ganpatrao Kabade casel. it is further contended that Suchita has completed her final year course of study. Madhuri is in midway and that, therefore, justice demands that their education should not be dislocated with the denial of the social status as Scheduled Tribes. The sheet-anchor for the counsel's argument is the judgment of the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in Subhash Ganpatrao Kabade case'. We find no force in the contentions.
Bombay High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 7 - Full Document
1   2 Next