Rajasthan Court August 2000 Judgments
Browse smarter
Open an 18-section brief on any judgment
Structured AI Brief in seconds on any result - plus Semantic Search when you need meaning, not just keywords.
- AI Brief & Ask
- Semantic AI Search
- Devil's Bench
Credentials emailed - log in to pick up where you left off.
The State of Rajasthan and ors. Vs. Bhoor Lal and ors.
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-01-2000
Reported in: 2001(1)WLN294
B.J. Shethna, J.1. This review application is filed to review the order dated 4.8.1995 passed by the Division Bench consisting of Mr. J.R. Chopra (as he then was) and Mr. G.L. Gupta, JJ. in D.B. Spl. Appeal No. 586/95 dismissing the special appeal.2. Learned Counsel Mr. Mathur for the petitioners relying upon the judgment of learned Single Judge (Hon'ble Dr. B.S. Chauhan, J.) dated 22.4.1998 delivered in S.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 1020/95 submitted that the matter is already referred to the larger bench, therefore, the order passed by the Division Bench be reviewed.3. We are afraid that this submission of Mr. Mathur cannot be accepted for the simple reason that the division bench of this Court dismissed the special appeal way back on 4.8.1995 on merits. Merely, because the learned single judge in another case later on referred the matter to the larger bench on similar issue, that itself would not be a ground to review the order because the scope of review is very narrow and limited. ...
Vinay Purohit Vs. Jai NaraIn University
Court: Rajasthan
Decided on: Aug-01-2000
Reported in: 2002(1)WLN451
Rajesh Balia, J.1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner.2. The petitioner was an unsuccessful examine at the examinations of Post Graduate Diploma in Economics of Foreign Trade and Exchange Examination, 1996. The petitioner was declared failed in two papers III and IV, in the first instance. On revaluation of papers, petitioner was declared passed in Paper III. However, he still could not secure pass marks of 40% in Paper IV titled 'Foreign Exchange in India.' However, as per modified result the petitioner failed in only one subject, he was given the benefit of appearing in the supplementary examination to 1996 main examination only in one paper. Since the supplementary examination to the main examination, 1996 were already over by that time, the petitioner was allowed to take the said supplementary examination, 1996 in the IV Paper as a consequence of his result alongwith the main examinations in the year 1997, which opportunity the petitioner availed. However, the petitioner agai...
- ‹ Prev
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
- 6
- 7
- Next ›