Back
ARUP KUMAR GOSWAMI, SANJAY AGRAWAL
Shimmer Singh Tandon D/o Pramod Tandon – Appellant
Versus
State of Chhattisgarh – Respondent
ORDER :
1. Heard Mr. Ravipal Maheshwari, learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner, Mr. Raghavendra Pradhan, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondents No. 1 and 3 as well as Ms. Anmol Sharma, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent No. 2 and 4.
2. The petitioner appeared in the National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (UG) 2022 (for short, the NEET) as a scheduled caste candidate.
3. In the petition, in paragraph 3 ‘Particulars of the order/cause against which the petition is made’ the petitioner states as follows:
4. In paragraph 8 ‘Facts of the case’ the petitioner states as follows:
8.2 That, the petitioner has passed minimum requisite qualification Higher Secondary in Biology subject. Copy of mark sheet of the Higher Secondary Education is bein
Court affirmed the importance of adhering to admission timelines and rejected jurisdiction under Article 226 for petitioner's procedural failures.
Timely submission of caste certificates is essential for eligibility in reservation, but unique case circumstances may allow leniency.
Adherence to the specified timeline for registration and admission process is crucial, and failure to register within the specified period cannot be excused.
The court cannot compel examination authorities to accept applications or fees after the official deadline, as such intervention disrupts established selection processes and undermines the integrity ....
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
