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

2024 Supreme(Online)(Kar) 37402

KARNATAKA HIGH COURT
BHANUSRI S – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF KARNATAKA – Respondent


ORAL ORDER

(PER: HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.JUSTICE N.V.ANJARIA)

Heard learned advocate Mr. Vinay Kuttappa for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate Smt. Mamatha Shetty for respondent No.1, learned advocate Mr. N.K. Ramesh for respondent No.2 and learned Deputy Solicitor General of India Mr. H. Shanthi Bhushan for respondent No.3.

2. By filing this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, the petitioner has prayed permission to amend and modify her category as Other Backward Classes in the “National Eligibility cum Entrance Test-PG” application. It was further prayed to direct respondent No.2, as a consequence, to consider the petitioner as belonging to caste Vakkaliga of Category IIIA of Other Backward Classes.

3. The facts are that the petitioner belongs to Vakkaliga community, which is listed at Sl.No.156 in the list of Other Backward Classes for the State of Karnataka published by the National Commission for Backward Classes. After completing 10th and 12th standard examinations, the petitioner aspired to pursue further education in the field of Medicine. She got enrolled herself to the National Eligibility cum Entrance Test (NEET). She made application No.

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