<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2013 (3) TMI 790 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274434</link>
    <description>The Indian Medicine Central Council Act framework required prior approval and compliance with minimum infrastructure and teaching standards before admissions, and the institutions had not cured persistent deficiencies in time for the 2011-12 academic year. Interim permission to file applications did not create any vested right to admission, and the Court accepted the expert regulatory assessment that the colleges were not fit to conduct the course. Because more than half of the first-year term had already elapsed and bridge or extra classes could not realistically restore the lost year, permission to admit students was refused and interference with the High Court&#039;s orders was declined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Jun 2019 10:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=530722" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (3) TMI 790 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274434</link>
      <description>The Indian Medicine Central Council Act framework required prior approval and compliance with minimum infrastructure and teaching standards before admissions, and the institutions had not cured persistent deficiencies in time for the 2011-12 academic year. Interim permission to file applications did not create any vested right to admission, and the Court accepted the expert regulatory assessment that the colleges were not fit to conduct the course. Because more than half of the first-year term had already elapsed and bridge or extra classes could not realistically restore the lost year, permission to admit students was refused and interference with the High Court&#039;s orders was declined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=274434</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>