w w w . L a w y e r S e r v i c e s . i n



Dr. D. Euvalingam & Others v/s The Secretary to Government, Ministry of Human Resource Development, New Delhi & Others


Company & Directors' Information:- J J DEVELOPMENT PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U50300WB1996PTC081491

Company & Directors' Information:- L N DEVELOPMENT LIMITED [Active] CIN = U70102ML1986PLC002590

Company & Directors' Information:- DR I T M LIMITED [Active] CIN = U67120CH1999PLC022651

Company & Directors' Information:- D P S DEVELOPMENT PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U45202WB1988PTC044797

Company & Directors' Information:- DEVELOPMENT CORPN PVT LTD [Active] CIN = U13209WB1939PTC009750

Company & Directors' Information:- B L AND CO NEW DELHI PRIVATE LIMITED [Active] CIN = U74899DL1968PTC004910

    W.P. Nos. 4582 of 2018, 14232 of 2017 & 11701 of 2018 & Cont P. Nos. 1266 & 1487 of 2019 & W.M.P. Nos. 5633 & 5634 of 2018, 9048 & 9306 of 2020, 12631 of 2018, 15736 of 2019, 15430 of 2017, 13672, 13673, 39308, 12080 of 2018, 9309 of 2020 & 13674 of 2019

    Decided On, 12 June 2020

    At, High Court of Judicature at Madras

    By, THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KRISHNAN RAMASAMY

    For Petitioners: V.B.R. Menon, Advocate. For the Respondents: R1, R3, B. Rabu Manohar, R5, L. Swaminathan, R2, P.R. Gopinathan, R11, Kumaresh Babu, Advocates, R3, R4, C.T. Ramesh, AGP.



Judgment Text


(Prayer in W.P.No. 4582 of 2018: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of 11 Nos of separate notices of 5th respondent dated 13.10.2017 demanding payment of Annual fees for the academic year 2018-19 from the petitioners 1 to 11 and to quash the same and consequently forbearing the respondent college from demanding and coercing the petitioners to pay further amounts towards annual fees for the academic year 2018-19 onwards and further directions by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in SLP(C) No. 19315 of 017.

Prayer in W.P.No. 14232 of 2017: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to declare that the fees payable for admission into Post Graduate Medical/Dental Courses in Self-Financing and Deemed Universities in Puducherry shall be as fixed to be fixed by the Puducherry Fee Committee, as the case may be, and consequently direct the respondents to finally fix the fees for the above admissions.

Prayer in W.P.No. 11701 of 2018: Writ petition filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India to issue a writ of certiorarified mandamus to call for the records of Notices in Ref. No. MGMCRI/ Tuition Fee/ 2018-19/ 17010610022018001 MGMCRI/ Tuition – Fee/2018-19/ 17011010092018001 MGMCRI/ Tuition-Fee/ 2018-19/ 170111510012018001 MGMCRI/ Tuition-Fee/ 2018-19/ 17011010062018001 MGMCRI/ Tuition-Fee/ 2018-19/ 17010610012018001 MGMCRI/ Tuition-Fee/ 2018-19/ 17012010032018001 MGMCRI/ Tuition-Fee/ 2018-19/ 17012010012018001 MGMCRI/ Tuition-Fee/ 2018-19/ 7010910072018001 dated 24.03.2018 demanding payment of Annual fees for the Academic year 2018-19 from the petitioners 1 to 8 and to quash the same and consequently to restrain the 5th respondent college from demanding and coercing the petitioners to pay further amount towards Annual Fees for the Academic Years 2018-19 and 2019-20 until the Hon'ble First Bench of this Court in W.P.14232 of 2017 finally determines the Annual Fee amounts for P.G.Medical Courses to the 5th respondent college.

Prayer in Cont P.No. 1266 of 2019: Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the Respondents for their willful and deliberate disobedience of the Interim Order passed by this Honourable Court on 26.04.2018 in W.P.No.14232 of 2017.

Prayer in Cont P No. 1487 of 2019: Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts Act, 1971 to punish the respondent for the willful and deliberate disobedience of the Interim Order passed by this Court on 22.04.2019 in WP.No.4582 of 2018.)

Common Order

M.M. Sundresh, J.

1. These three writ petitions and the contempt petitions are posted before us pursuant to the order passed by The Hon'ble Chief Justice on the administrative side. To be noted, W.P.No. 14237 of 2017 has been posted before us as the Bench hearing the matter declined to hear the same. Since the other two writ petitions were posted before the learned Single Judge, in view of the commonality of the issue involved, they are accordingly posted before us after getting appropriate orders from the Hon'ble Chief Justice.

2. W.P.No.14232 of 2017 is a public interest litigation filed by the petitioner, who is a practising advocate. Incidentally, he as counsel filed other two writ petitions, namely, W.P.No. 4582 of 2018 and W.P.No.11701 of 2018 on behalf of the writ petitioners.

3. The issue involved pertains to the fixation of fee by the private respondents, namely, the deemed Universities. In W.P.No.14232 of 2017, the Honb'le First Bench was pleased to pass the following order:-

“21.The admission of students in medical institutions as also fee charged by such medical institutions are ex-facie the matters of immense public importance. This Court cannot shut its eyes to impediments in the way of individual litigation by young students. This Court can take note of the facts pleaded by a public spirited citizen in a public interest litigation and suo motu pass orders to redress the grievances of the student community. Moreover, we are informed that separate writ petitions have also been filed by and/or on behalf of affected candidates.

22. We, therefore, deem it appropriate to pass an interim order directing the deemed Universities to admit the students provisionally selected and successful in the admission tests/counselling to the vacant seats in order of their merit, subject to the condition that the students shall each deposit Rs.10.00 lakhs at the time of admission towards the annual fee for the first year with CENTAC (third respondent) and subject to the further condition that in the event the fees determined by the Fee Committee that may be constituted by the University Grants Commission (seventh respondent) and Ministry of Human Resource Development (sixth respondent) to study the fee structure of the deemed Universities is higher, they shall pay the differential amount. Needless to mention that those students who have already taken admission by depositing the full fees will, if necessary, be entitled to refund/adjustment of the difference between the fees that might be determined by the Committee and the amount paid by them. Such admission shall be effected within 5 P.M. on 19th June 2017 and the students will be allowed to provisionally attend their classes from 20th June 2017. Needless to mention that the admission of students pursuant to this interim order shall abide by the result of the writ petition.

23. We are informed that there are some nonclinical courses in the deemed universities for which the fees varies between Rs.3 to 4 Lakhs. In such case, the students will be required to pay the amount of fees charged and not Rs.10 Lakhs.

24. Considering that the future of the students who are admitted pursuant to this interim order remains uncertain, there is an immense urgency and we expect that the University Grants Commission (seventh respondent) and Ministry of Human Resource Development (sixth respondent) shall forthwith constitute a Committee to regulate the fees chargeable by the self-financed deemed Universities, after giving all stakeholders including the Universities adequate opportunity of representation. The decision of the Fee Committee shall abide by the result of the writ petition.”

4. This order was put to challenge by the Deemed Universities before the Apex Court. The Apex Court confirmed the order of the Division Bench referred supra. Thereafter, a further order was passed on 26.04.2018 by the Division Bench which is extracted hereunder:-

“3. The deemed universities filed a Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court against the order of this Court dated 16.06.2017. There appears to have been some mis-statement at the time of hearing to the effect that the judgment and order dated 16.06.2017 was a final judgment and order, as would be evident from the cause title of the order of the Supreme Court dated 16.04.2018, dismissing the Special Leave Petition and requesting the High ourt to decide the matter within a period of six months. The Supreme Court also gave liberty to the Committee to submit its report to this Court in accordance with law.

4. No Committee has yet been constituted, in view of the Special Leave Petition in the Supreme Court. We direct the University Grants Commission and the Ministry of Human Resources Development to forthwith constitute a Committee, to regulate the fees chargeable by self-financed deemed Universities, as directed by the order of this Court dated 16.06.2017, after giving all stakeholders including the deemed universities adequate opportunity of representation. The Fee Committee should be constituted within three (3) weeks from date and the Fee Committee shall take a decision within four (4) months from the date of its constitution, which will abide by the result of the writ petition.”

5. In W.P.Nos.4582 and 11701 of 2018, an interim order was passed by the learned Single Judge on 22.04.2019. The payment, as directed, was by way of consent restricted to the petitioners alone. Incidentally, the learned Single Judge has observed that the further payment would be made depending upon the decision of the Fee Committee, as directed to be constituted by the order of the Division Bench referred supra.

6. The petitioners in W.P.Nos. 4582 and 11701 of 2018 got their admissions for the PG Courses from the private respondents/Deemed Universities. They have, accordingly, paid the fees as demanded by them. It is this fixation which was questioned by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner in W.P.No.14232 of 2017. The constitution of the Fee Committee has been challenged by the private Universities before the Hon'ble Apex Court. The earlier interim order granted was modified permitting the Fee Committee to proceed further while not publishing the final decision awaiting further orders.

7. In pursuance of the orders passed by the learned Single Judge, dated 22.04.2019, the petitioners in W.P.Nos. 4582 and 11701 of 2018 duly paid the agreed amount as fees for the II year. However, for the III year, no fee has been paid as the Fee Committee could not decide the issue in view of the challenge made by the Deemed Universities before the Apex Court.

8. Though various contentions have been raised by the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we are not inclined to go into the merits of the case. Insofar as W.P.No.14232 of 2017 is concerned, appropriate orders can only be passed awaiting orders from the Hon'ble Apex Court and based upon the same, the decision of the Fee Committee. Therefore, we are inclined to adjourn the said case awaiting orders from the Hon'ble Apex Court.

9. Insofar as W.P.Nos. 4582 and 11701 of 2018 are concerned, the petitioners will have to write the examinations. Pursuant to the interim order granted, they are allowed to continue. Even here, the question of appropriate fees would depend upon the final decision of the Fee Committee. Therefore, we made a suggestion to the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and the Deemed Universities to arrive at an agreed amount in this regard.

10. Ultimately, it has been decided that the petitioners can pay a sum of Rs.13.00 lakhs without prejudice to the contentions of both sides on or before 30 June 2020. On such payment, the petitioners will be permitted to write the examinations. The question of excess payment to be returned by the Universities or payment of further fees by the petitioners would obviously depend upon the decision of the Apex Court followed by that of the Fee Committee. Therefore, consciously, we leave all the issues open to be decided at the appropriate stage by the appropriate forum. However, we make it clear that the question of payment of stipend will have to be decided in the pending writ petitions.

11. We may note, even before the learned Single Judge, in the order dated 22.04.2019, there was a consent with respect to the payment of fees by way of an interim arrangement and the order of the Division Bench as confirmed by the Apex Court at least with respect to the constitution of the Fee Committee has become final. Even there, the Division Bench has passed an interim order keeping in mind the i

Please Login To View The Full Judgment!

nterest of all the stakeholders. 12. In such view of the matter, we are inclined to dispose of the writ petitions, namely, W.P.No. 4582 and 2018 and W.P.No. 11707 of 2018 by directing each of the petitioner, as agreed upon by them through their respective counsel before us, to pay a sum of Rs.13.00 lakhs to the private respondents, namely, the deemed Universities on or before 30 June 2020. On such payment, the private respondents/deemed Universities will have to permit the petitioners to write the examinations. All the contentions on merits, are left open. The parties are at liberty to come for any other relief by way of a separate litigation, if they choose to do so. 13. W.P.No. 4582 of 2018 and W.P. No. 11707 of 2018 are disposed of accordingly. No costs. Consequently, connected W.M.P.Nos. 5633 of 2018, 9309 of 2020, 39308 of 2018,13672 to 13674 of 2018 are closed. 14. W.P.No. 14232 of 2017 will be taken up awaiting orders from the Apex Court since in the pending matters, challenge has been made to the constitution of the Fee Committee. The other writ petition than those dealt with including the contempt petitions (Cont P.Nos. 1266 of 2019 and 1487 of 2019) are adjourned to be taken up along with W.P.No.14232 of 2017.
O R







Judgements of Similar Parties

07-10-2020 Dr. P. Sathish Reddy Versus Shantha Bai National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
06-10-2020 Rikhab Jain Versus M/S. Trackon Couriers Private Limited, New Delhi & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
05-10-2020 Tarun Kanti Chowdhury & Others Versus Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
01-10-2020 M/s. Harihar Buildspace Pvt. Ltd. G-III, Amar Palace, Panchsheel Square, Dhantoli, Nagpur Versus Union of India Through its Chief Secretary, Ministry of Power, Shramshakti Bhavan, New Delhi & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
01-10-2020 Construction Industry Development Council, New Delhi Versus Arjun Singh & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
01-10-2020 M. Meenachi Muppidathi Versus The Government of India, Representing by The Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
01-10-2020 M. Meenachi Muppidathi Versus The Government of India, Representing by The Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, New Delhi & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
30-09-2020 Lalatendu Nayak & Another Versus Supertech Ltd., New Delhi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-09-2020 M/s. Taneja Developers & Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi Versus Col. B.S. Goraya National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
30-09-2020 Pavai Varam Educational Trust, Established & Namakkal Represented by Chairman, V. Natarajan Versus The Pharmacy Council of India, Represented by the Secretary Cum Registrar, New Delhi High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-09-2020 Rhonpal Biotech Pvt. Ltd. Versus New Delhi Municipal Council & Others High Court of Delhi
25-09-2020 Dr. P. Vijila Versus The Secretary to Government Health & Family Welfare Department Secretariat, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
25-09-2020 Dr. Jitendra Gupta Versus Dr. C. Chandramouli, IAS (Secretary, DoP&T, Government of India) Supreme Court of India
23-09-2020 C.M. Gadha & Another Versus Bar Council of India, New Delhi, Rep. by Its Secretary & Others High Court of Kerala
23-09-2020 Dr. Keshav Baliram Hedgewar Paryayi Versus The State of Maharashtra, through Principal Secretary, Medical Education and Drugs Department & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
22-09-2020 Dr. H.T. Arvind Rao & Another Versus Dr. Kumuda & Another High Court of Karnataka
21-09-2020 Tvl. Transtonnelstroy Afcons Joint Venture, Represented by its Authorised Signatory, Chennai Versus Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
21-09-2020 Dr. B. Chandrashekara Versus State of Karnataka, Represented by its Principal Secretary Education Department (Collegiate Education), Bangalore & Others High Court of Karnataka
21-09-2020 Oriental Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus M/s. Guptasons Jewellers & Gems Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
21-09-2020 Dr. Rajesh Kumar Yaduvanshi Versus Serious Fraud Investigation Office (SFIO) & Another High Court of Delhi
18-09-2020 K. Murugan: Petitioner in W.P (MD). No. 2547/15 T. Velladurai, Petitioner in W.P (MD). No. 2548/15, Versus The Block Development Officer, (Village Panchayat), Panchayat Union Office, Alangulam & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
18-09-2020 Dr. Battepati C. Narasimhulu Versus The Director of Medical Education High Court of Andhra Pradesh
18-09-2020 Dr. Geeta Mallikarjun Patil Versus Vice – Chancellor, Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marathwada University, Aurangabad & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
17-09-2020 M/s. A.G. Neuro Hospitals (P) Ltd., through its Managing Director Dr. P. Sundararajan Salem Versus The Inspector General of Registration & Chief Controller of Revenue Authority, Chennai & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
17-09-2020 Advocate Thoufeek Ahamed Versus Union of India, Represented by Secretary (Justice), Ministry of Law & Justice, New Delhi & Another High Court of Kerala
15-09-2020 United India Insurance Company Ltd., Through The Regional Manager, New Delhi Versus Dinesh Vijay National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
14-09-2020 Tuticorin Stevedores' Association, Rep.by its Secretary, Tuticorin Versus The Government of India, Rep.by its Secretary, Ministry of Shipping, New Delhi & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
14-09-2020 Dr. Varghese Perayil Versus The Election Commission of India, New Delhi, Rep. by Its Secretary & Others High Court of Kerala
10-09-2020 Raina Begum Versus The Union of India Rep. By The Comm & Secy. to The Govt. of India, Home Deptt., New Delhi-01, India & Others High Court of Gauhati
09-09-2020 Oriental College of Teacher Education, Represented by Its Manager, Calicut Versus The Regional Director, National Council for Teacher Education, New Delhi High Court of Kerala
09-09-2020 Dr. Jaishri Laxmanrao Patil Versus The Chief Minister & Another Supreme Court of India
09-09-2020 Vidarbha Irrigation Development Corporation, through Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Division, Nagpur Versus Laxman Seetaram Neulkar & Another In the High Court of Bombay at Nagpur
08-09-2020 Dr. Joseph Freeman Motha & Another Versus Sudha Vijayan & Another High Court of Kerala
08-09-2020 S. Jagannatha Rao Versus Air India Limited, Rep. by its Chairman and Managing Director, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
08-09-2020 The Dental Council of India, Aiwan-E-Galib Marg, New Delhi Versus PSR Lakhmi Bhuvaneshwari Preethi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
07-09-2020 Badri Narayan Singh & Another Versus The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) Government of India, through the Home Secretary North Block, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Patna
07-09-2020 Suneeta Sharma Versus Greater Mohali Area Development Authority, Punjab & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
04-09-2020 Dr. Vani Viswanathan Versus Union of India & Others High Court of Delhi
03-09-2020 B. Rajesh & Another Versus Union of India, Rep. by its Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
02-09-2020 G.C. Kishor Kumar Versus Karnataka State Handicrafts Development Corporation Ltd., Rep. by its Managing Director, Bengaluru & Others High Court of Karnataka
01-09-2020 M/s Elgi Equipments Ltd., Rep.by its company Secretary, S. Raveendar, Coimbatore Versus M/s Kurichi New Town Development Authority Rep.by its Member Secretary, Kurichi, Coimbatore & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
01-09-2020 Hyundai Motor India Ltd., New Delhi Versus Harshad Ramji Chauhan & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
01-09-2020 Pavai Varam Educational Trust Established and Administering, Paavai College of Pharmacy and Research, Rep. by Chairman V. Natarajan Versus The Pharmacy Council of India, Represented by the Secretary cum Registrar, New Delhi High Court of Judicature at Madras
31-08-2020 Dr.R.S. Gupta Versus Govt. of NCTD & Others High Court of Delhi
31-08-2020 Dr. Vijay Mallya Versus State Bank of India & Others Supreme Court of India
31-08-2020 M/s. Omaxe Limited, New Delhi & Another Versus Divya Karun & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
28-08-2020 Dr. Navroz Mehta Versus Union of India & Another High Court of Delhi
28-08-2020 State of Madhya Pradesh Versus Centre for Environment Protection Research & Development & Others Supreme Court of India
28-08-2020 Dr. Samjaison Versus The Deputy Director of Health Services, Ramanathapuram & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
28-08-2020 M/s Urban Systems Versus The Union of India Rep. By The Secretary To The Govt of India, Min of Finance, Deptt of Revenue Central Board of Indirect Taxes And Customs, North Block, New Delhi & Others High Court of Gauhati
27-08-2020 Dr. Rajesh Versus Triloki Raghubani & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
27-08-2020 Master Vinay Bharadwaj, Rep. by his Father & Natural Guardian D.R. Shivakumar Versus M/s. United India Insurance Company Limited, Bangalore & Another High Court of Karnataka
26-08-2020 New India Assurance Co. Ltd., Delhi Versus Maninderjeet Singh Khera National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
26-08-2020 Davinder Nath Sethi & Another Versus M/s. Purearth Infrastructure Limited, New Delhi National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
26-08-2020 Dr.Prabaharan SRS Versus Vellore Institute of Technology (VIT) Represented by its Chancellor Dr. G. Viswanathan, Vellore & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-08-2020 M/s. Leo Activation, Division of Black Pencil Advertising Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai, Rep. by Its Director Versus The 49th All India Congress of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Kochi, Represented by Its Organizing Committee Chairman, Dr. V.P. Paily High Court of Kerala
26-08-2020 Dr. Vijayakumar Rau Versus Dr. B. Manohar Rama Rau & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
26-08-2020 Karvy Stock Broking Limited, Represented by its Vicepresident (Legal) Ch. Viswanath Versus The Union of India, Represented by its Secretary, Ministry of Corporate Affairs, New Delhi & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
25-08-2020 Gopal Krishna Mishra Versus State of Chhattisgarh through The Secretary, Department of Tribal Welfare Development, Mantralaya, New Raipur Chhattisgarh & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
25-08-2020 Dr. Jaya Patel Versus State of M. P. & Another High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Indore
25-08-2020 The Deputy General Manager, Small Industries Development Bank of India, Coimbatore & Another Versus M/s. Annamalai Hotels (Pvt.) Ltd., Rep.by its Managing Director, P. Velusamy, Coimbatore High Court of Judicature at Madras
24-08-2020 Sanjay Nayyar Versus State of NCT Delhi, New Delhi & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-08-2020 United India Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus Singhla Engineers & Contractors Pvt. Ltd. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
24-08-2020 R.K. Dawra Versus Union of India, Through Secretary Ministry of Communication, Department of Telecommunication, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
21-08-2020 Pankaj Chaudhary, HCS, Special Secretary, Public Health Engineer Department Versus Union of India, through its Secretary, Department of Personnel & Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
21-08-2020 Dr. Parimal Roy, Working as Director, Indian Council of Agricultural Research NIVEDI Versus The President, Indian Council of Agricultural Research Krishi Bhavan, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Bangalore Bench
19-08-2020 V.K. Somarajan Pillai Versus Union of India, Represented by the Secretary to Govt. of India, Department of Posts, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Ernakulam Bench
19-08-2020 Dr. Aminu Aliyar Versus All India Institute of Medical Sciences High Court of Delhi
19-08-2020 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi Versus Adv. Shiji Joseph & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
19-08-2020 Dr. B. Ganesh Versus The Principal Navodaya Medical College, Raichur & Others High Court of Karnataka
18-08-2020 The Registrar (Judicial), High Court of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad Versus The Union of India, The Secretary, Ministry of Home Affairs, Government of India, New Delhi & Others In the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad
18-08-2020 Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Co. Ltd., New Delhi Versus Astha Cement Pvt. Ltd. National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
17-08-2020 New India Assurance Company Ltd., New Delhi Versus Shailendra Prasad Singh National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
14-08-2020 Kasmikoya Biyyammabiyoda & Others Versus Union of India, Represented by Home Secretary, Secretariat, Government of India, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
13-08-2020 Mukesh Bhavarlal Bhandari Versus Dr. Nagesh Bhandari High Court of Gujarat At Ahmedabad
13-08-2020 Brahmaputra Infrastructure Ltd, New Delhi & Another Versus State of Bihar & Another High Court of Judicature at Patna
13-08-2020 Karakapally Pusparaju Versus The State of Telangana, Rep., by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development Department & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
13-08-2020 Ayush Medical Association Through Member Dr. Mahendra Kumar Sao, (Central Council), Chhattisgarh & Another Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Others High Court of Chhattisgarh
12-08-2020 Abdul Saleem Pattakal & Another Versus The Director General Bureau of Civil Aviation Security, A-Wing, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
12-08-2020 Scott Christian College, Rep.by its Correspondent S. Byju Nizeth Paaul Versus The Member Secretary, All India Council for Technical Education, New Delhi & Another High Court of Judicature at Madras
11-08-2020 Dr. Samir Rai & Another Versus Medanta Hospital & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
11-08-2020 Khaja Nayeemuddin Versus State of Telangana, Rep. by its Principal Secretary, Municipal Administration & Urban Development & Others High Court of for the State of Telangana
11-08-2020 V.P. Sharma & Others Versus Dr. G.S. Kochar Surgeon Urologist) & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
10-08-2020 Maranalloor Milk Producers Co. Operative Society Ltd. Represented by Its Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram & Others Versus The Registrar /Director, Directorate of Dairy Development, Pattom & Others High Court of Kerala
07-08-2020 The Commissioner of Income Tax-V, New Delhi Versus M/s. Nalwa Investment Ltd. & Others High Court of Delhi
07-08-2020 Dr. Rajesh Khoth Versus State of Haryana, through Chief Secretary & Another Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
07-08-2020 Surender Singh Dahiya, Additional Director, Agriculture Department, Government of Haryana (Panchkula) Versus Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances & Pensions, Department of Personnel & Training, New Delhi & Others Central Administrative Tribunal Chandigarh Bench
07-08-2020 Citibank N.A., New Delhi Versus Deepanshu Kumar & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
07-08-2020 M/s. B & B Growing, New Delhi & Another Versus Capital Co-Op. Group Housing Society Ltd., Delhi & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
06-08-2020 Syed Firdouse Begum Versus State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Panchayat Raj & Rural Development Department & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
06-08-2020 Rajiv Bal Versus Harrison Industries, New Delhi & Others National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
06-08-2020 Peter & Others Versus Union of India, Represented by Its Secretary, Ministry of Environment, Forest & Climate Change, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala
05-08-2020 K. Ramalingamma Versus State of Andhra Pradesh, rep. by its Principal Secretary, Department of Panchayat Raj & Rural Development, Velagapudi, Amaravathi & Others High Court of Andhra Pradesh
05-08-2020 Sudhindra Das Versus Assam Fisheries Development Corporation Ltd & Others High Court of Gauhati
04-08-2020 S. Ganesan Versus The Commissioner, Department of Rural Development & Panchayat Raj, Chennai & Another Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
04-08-2020 Dr. P. Elangovan Versus The Principal-in-charge, Pachaiyappa's College, Chennai & Others High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-08-2020 M/s. Pioneer Power Ltd, Rep. by its Chief General Manager, Therkukattur Village, Ramanathapuram Versus Union of India, Rep. by its Secretary Ministry of Petroleum & Natural Gas, New Delhi & Others Before the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court
04-08-2020 Union of India, Rep by its Secretary to the Government, Department of Home Affairs, New Delhi & Others Versus Siva Lakshmi High Court of Judicature at Madras
04-08-2020 Santosh Kumar Garg (Deceased) Versus U.P. Housing & Development Board, U.P. & Another National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission NCDRC
04-08-2020 P. Anil Kumar @ Chempazhanthi Anil & Others Versus The Indian Red Cross Society, Represented by Its Secretary General, National IRCS, New Delhi & Others High Court of Kerala