Back
CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT
*Arup Kumar Goswami, C. J., Sanjay Agrawal, J.
Shimmer Singh Tandon v. State of Chhattisgarh
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner claimed deprivation from neet counseling due to technical issues. (Para 2 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. court observed the procedural failures in petitioner's claims. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 3. court underscored the importance of admission timelines. (Para 10 , 11) |
1. Heard Mr. Ravipal Maheshwari, learned counsel, appearing for the 2nd petitioner, Mr. Raghavendra Pradhan, learned Additional Advocate General, appearing for the respondent Nos. 1 and 3 as well as Ms. Anmol Sharma, learned counsel, appearing for the respondent Nos. 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:
“By way of this petition the petitioner is not challenging any particular order on the part of the respondent authorities, but due to technically fault, the petitioner payment could not be received due to deprived off for registration of MPBS course in private college.”
4. In paragraph 8 'Facts of the case', the petitioner states as follows:
“8.1 That, the petitioner is citizen
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
