Court : Delhi
..... as per clause-c of section 16 of the tibbia college act 1952.2. the board, with the sanction of the lt.governor of delhi, made applicable pay scales as notified by university grant commission for teaching and non-teaching staff of the central universities with effect from january 01, 1986 and also adopted the various ..... merit promotion schemes notified by university grant commission.3. due to malfunctioning by the board, on may 01, 1998, the government of nct of delhi superseded the board and took over the management of the college. the delhi tibbia college (takeover) act, 1998 was simultaneously promulgated and with respect to the ..... supplementary rules. this became the contract of takeover or the terms of the takeover. we find that the respondents have not challenged section 7 of the takeover act as amended.16. fundamental principles of jurisprudence applicable to service law have been overlooked by the tribunal warranting corrective action to be taken, which we do, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... as per clause-c of section 16 of the tibbia college act 1952.2. the board, with the sanction of the lt.governor of delhi, made applicable pay scales as notified by university grant commission for teaching and non-teaching staff of the central universities with effect from january 01, 1986 and also adopted the various ..... merit promotion schemes notified by university grant commission.3. due to malfunctioning by the board, on may 01, 1998, the government of nct of delhi superseded the board and took over the management of the college. the delhi tibbia college (takeover) act, 1998 was simultaneously promulgated and with respect to the ..... supplementary rules. this became the contract of takeover or the terms of the takeover. we find that the respondents have not challenged section 7 of the takeover act as amended.16. fundamental principles of jurisprudence applicable to service law have been overlooked by the tribunal warranting corrective action to be taken, which we do, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... as per clause-c of section 16 of the tibbia college act 1952.2. the board, with the sanction of the lt.governor of delhi, made applicable pay scales as notified by university grant commission for teaching and non-teaching staff of the central universities with effect from january 01, 1986 and also adopted the various ..... merit promotion schemes notified by university grant commission.3. due to malfunctioning by the board, on may 01, 1998, the government of nct of delhi superseded the board and took over the management of the college. the delhi tibbia college (takeover) act, 1998 was simultaneously promulgated and with respect to the ..... supplementary rules. this became the contract of takeover or the terms of the takeover. we find that the respondents have not challenged section 7 of the takeover act as amended.16. fundamental principles of jurisprudence applicable to service law have been overlooked by the tribunal warranting corrective action to be taken, which we do, .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... class as those listed. 44. the meaning of the expression ejusdem generis was considered by this court on a number of occasions and has been reiterated in maharashtra university of health sciences and ors. vs. satchikitsa prasarak mandal & ors. [(2010) 3 scc 786] the principle is defined thus : the latin expression ejusdem ..... . this court in canara banks case (supra) reiterated the principle laid down in managing director, ecil, hyderabad & ors. vs. b. karunakar & ors. [(1993) 4 scc 727] here again, this court has reiterated that even an administrative order, which involved civil consequences, must be consistent with the rules of natural justice. the ..... shares in the ordinary course of business. the regulation provides exemption from regulation 10, 11 and 12 to scheduled commercial banks or public financial institutions acting as pledgees in the ordinary course of business, in order to facilitate their business operations. such acquisition of shares in normal circumstances is not with .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Supreme Court of India
..... open offer need not be on account of impossibility only. in support of these submissions, he relied on municipal corporation of greater bombay vs. bharat petroleum corporation ltd.[6]. maharashtra university of health sciences & ors. vs. satchikitsa prasarak mandal & ors. [7]. and union of india & ors. vs. alok kumar [8]..38. we are unable to ..... the appeal and it is accordingly dismissed. .. . j.[surinder singh nijjar]. .j.[anil r. dave]. new delhi; may 09, 2013.-.---------------------- [1]. (2003) 4 scc 55.[2]. (1993) 4 scc 72.[3]. (2011) 2 scc 25.[4]. (2012) 2 scc 32.[5]. (1996) 4 scc 6.[6]. (2002) 4 scc 219.[7]. (2010) 3 scc 78 ..... that acquire shares in the ordinary course of business. the regulation provides exemption from regulation 10, 11 and 12 to scheduled commercial banks or public financial institutions acting as pledgees in the ordinary course of business, in order to facilitate their business operations. such acquisition of shares in normal circumstances is not with the intention .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Madhya Pradesh
..... in by promotion of reserved category persons. since the persons like petitioners, who are senior enough, have been denied promotion in such illegal manner by the respondent-university, they have represented the claim before the respondent no.1 but since nothing was done, this writ petition is required to be filed. it is contended ..... the record.5. it is not in dispute that the 100 point roster is made applicable by the respondent-university. it is also not disputed that the provisions of the act aforesaid are made applicable by the university. thus, it would be clear that circular so issued by the state government in respect of maintaining 100 ..... point roster would be applicable to the respondent-university. the government of madhya pradesh in general administration department has issued a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... parmesh dutta for exemption from net examination was placed before the exemption committee in its meeting held on 16.12.1996. after considering the proposal received from tezpur university, the committee agreed to grant exemption from net qualification to shri parmesh dutta in view of his excellent publications and recommendations of the selection committee. a ..... be sufficient for giving exemption from net qualifications. also, on a further pointed query, counsel for the ugc could not show any document that ugc was acting in terms of a particular declared/stated policy which delienated specific criteria when exemption can be granted from net qualification and when exemption cannot be granted.6. ..... of clearing net examination for those persons who had submitted ph.d thesis or passed m.phil examination by 31.12.1993, and ms. anita ghosh had obtained ph.d qualification by 31.12.1993. it is accordingly argued that the selection committee had no option but to choose ms. anita ghosh who was a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Delhi
..... parmesh dutta for exemption from net examination was placed before the exemption committee in its meeting held on 16.12.1996. after considering the proposal received from tezpur university, the committee agreed to grant exemption from net qualification to shri parmesh dutta in view of his excellent publications and recommendations of the selection committee. a ..... be sufficient for giving exemption from net qualifications. also, on a further pointed query, counsel for the ugc could not show any document that ugc was acting in terms of a particular declared/stated policy which delienated specific criteria when exemption can be granted from net qualification and when exemption cannot be granted.6. ..... of clearing net examination for those persons who had submitted ph.d thesis or passed m.phil examination by 31.12.1993, and ms. anita ghosh had obtained ph.d qualification by 31.12.1993. it is accordingly argued that the selection committee had no option but to choose ms. anita ghosh who was a .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chandigarh
..... these judgments are not applicable. this is a case of refund of fee and it has been specifically mentioned by the honble supreme court in maharshi dayanand university v. surjeet kaur?, 2010(2) cpc 696 s.c., relying upon all earlier judgments held that education is not a commodity. educational institutions are not ..... the opposite parties, who filed written statement taking preliminary objections that the complainant is not entitled to get any refund as per the policy of the university as well as guidelines of all india council of technical education (in short aicte), the complainant joined and attended the classes for the ist semester, ..... service. such matters cannot be entertained by the consumer forum under the consumer protection act, 1986. further honble supreme court in bihar school examination board versus suresh prasad sinha?, 2010 (1) clt 255 (sc) observed that the education boards and universities are not service provider and the complaints against them are not maintainable. the .....
Tag this Judgment!Court : Punjab State Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission SCDRC Chandigarh
..... these judgments are not applicable. this is a case of refund of fee and it has been specifically mentioned by the honble supreme court in maharshi dayanand university v. surjeet kaur?, 2010(2) cpc 696 s.c., relying upon all earlier judgments held that education is not a commodity. educational institutions are not ..... the opposite parties, who filed written statement taking preliminary objections that the complainant is not entitled to get any refund as per the policy of the university as well as guidelines of all india council of technical education (in short aicte), the complainant joined and attended the classes for the ist semester, ..... service. such matters cannot be entertained by the consumer forum under the consumer protection act, 1986. further honble supreme court in bihar school examination board versus suresh prasad sinha?, 2010 (1) clt 255 (sc) observed that the education boards and universities are not service provider and the complaints against them are not maintainable. the .....
Tag this Judgment!