Back
AJAY BHANOT
Saumya Tiwari – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. The narrative is being structured in the following framework to facilitate the discussion:
| A. | Introduction | ||
| B. | Submissions | ||
| C. | Facts | ||
| D. | Issues for consideration | ||
| E. | Statutory perspectives:
| a. | University statutes |
| b. | Analogous provisions | ||
| c. | International Instruments | ||
| d. | Constitutional provisions | ||
| F. | Case laws | ||
| G. | Evolution of Fundamental Rights legislative lag and executive inertia | ||
| H. | Education & Universities | ||
| I. | Conclusions & Directions | ||
2. The petitioner asserts that she could not successfully complete B.Tech. (Electronics and Communication) course in the period prescribed in the University Regulations, as she was not granted maternity leave nor provided maternity support benefits as an expectant mother and as a new mother. She claims entitlement to an additional chance in an enlarged time period to appear in the two papers of B. Tech. (Electronics & Communication) which she could not clear in the regular academic calender.
B. Submissions
3. Sri Lal Dev Chaurasiya, learned counsel and Sri
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
