SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1991 Supreme(Bom) 445

K.SUKUMARAN, S.P.KURDUKAR, P.D.DESAI
Ashwin Prafulla Pimpalwar – Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra – Respondent


JUDGMENT - K. SUKUMARAN, J. :---A prelude to the cases before the Court:

Admissions to Professional Colleges, Medical, Engineering or other generates regularly and recurringly, an annual spurt of litigation. They raise quite often complex and complicated legal problems. Courts, particularly, the Constitutional, have the duty and responsibility to resolve the controversies. This feature was adverted to in a recent judgment by the Apex Court Vide (Dr. Ku. Nilofar Insaf v. State of Madhya Pradesh and others)1, J.T.1991(3) S.C. 433).

2. The time constraint for rendering the decision is often adverted to by the courts; for that cannot be a retrieval when the sands of time run off. It would be cruelty of a high order to expose indefinitely the flower of intelligent youth to a distressing situation of disconcerting unpredictibility. The rush and hurry required for an expeditious decision, in turn, entail difficulties on para of Counsel, long arguments in courts and serious consideration by the Judges. When numerous cases come before different Benches of the High Court (as in the Present case - Bombay and Nagpur) and when different Benches reach irreconciably opposite conclusions, the exig
















































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top