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

DELHI HIGH COURT
SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA, SUBRAMONIUM PRASAD
Sachin – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent


Table of Content
1. petitioners seek to challenge regulations. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4)
2. description and context of the impugned regulation. (Para 5 , 6 , 7)
3. petitioners argue regulation is unconstitutional. (Para 8 , 9)
4. respondents defend validity of regulation. (Para 10)
5. court examines relevant legal questions. (Para 11 , 12)
6. principles of constitutionality in legislation. (Para 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17)
7. regulations set limits on exam attempts. (Para 18 , 19)
8. regulatory rationale is upheld by court. (Para 20 , 21 , 22)
9. presumption of constitutionality remains. (Para 23)
10. second issue of granting additional attempts. (Para 24 , 25)
11. reference to precedence regarding attempts. (Para 26 , 27 , 28)
12. discussion on vested rights. (Para 29 , 30 , 31)
13. concept of legitimate expectation reviewed. (Para 32 , 33 , 34 , 35)
14. final determination on impugned regulations. (Para 36)
15. dismissal of writ petitions ordered. (Para 37 , 38)

JUDGMENT

Subramonium Prasad, J.

1. The instant Writ Petitions have been filed under Article 226 read with Article 227, of the Constitution of India by the Petitioner Students seeking inter alia, setting aside of Regulation 7.7 of Regulations on

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