Back
2003(2) Supreme 869
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
(From Punjab & Haryana High Court)
R.C. Lahoti & A.R. Lakshmanan, JJ.
Naseem -Petitioner
versus
State of Haryana & Ors. -Respondents
Special Leave Petition (C) No. 4113 of 2002
Decided on 26-3-2003
Counsel for the Parties :
For the Petitioner : Dr. Sushil Balwda, Anil Hooda and S.K. Sabharwal, Advocates.
For the Respondents : Neeraj K. Jain, A.K. Choudhary, Bharat Singh, Sanjay Singh, J.B. Mudgil, Ugra Shankar Pd. and L.K. Pandey, Advocates.
Held : We cannot compel and autonomous educational institution to grant admission to a candidate not holding the requisite eligibility qualification from an institution recognized by it. Since the admission has been denied at the very threshold, the applicability of the rule of promissory estoppel is also not attracted. No fault can be found with the view taken by the High Court. The special leave petition is dismissed. (Para 1)
ORDER
The petitioner has been denied admission on the ground that she had passed the qualifying examination from an institution not recognized by the respondent No. 2. We cannot compel and autonomous educational institution to grant admission to a candidate not holding the requisite eligibility qualification from an institution recognized by it. Since the admission has been denied at the very threshold, the applicability of the rule of promissory estoppel is also not attracted. No fault can be found with the view taken by the High Court. The special leave petition is dismissed.
(N.K.R.) SLP dismissed.
****************
Parallel Citations of other Journals :
Naseem v. State of Haryana & Ors., 2003(2) Supreme 869 : 2003(3) JT 238 : 2003(3) SLR 320 : 2003(2) SCSLJ 88 : 2003(4) ACE 118 : 2003(4) SBR 436.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
