Latest news with #NongmeikapamKotiswarSingh
Time of India
24-06-2025
- Politics
- Time of India
SC junks plea against RPSC exam schedule
Jaipur: A division bench of Supreme Court Tuesday refused to grant any interim relief to petitioners who challenged the schedule of RPSC's school lecturer and coach recruitment exam, 2024, as it clashed with the UGC-NET (June 2025) exam. Seventeen petitioners had approached the Supreme Court, and the matter was heard by a bench comprising Justices KV Viswanathan and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh. Rajasthan govt's additional advocate general Shiv Mangal Sharma stated before the court, "The state govt already took a decision on rescheduling the exam dates for the three subjects that clashed with the UGC-NET. Now no clash remains, and the grievances of the petitioners stand resolved; hence no interim order should be passed in the matter. " Opposing any further interference, the state stated and placed facts that the recruitment exam was vital to fill over 2,200 vacancies and was being conducted at 904 centres in 21 cities for over 6 lakh candidates. You Can Also Check: Jaipur AQI | Weather in Jaipur | Bank Holidays in Jaipur | Public Holidays in Jaipur "Any disruption would not only jeopardise this exam but also delay 35 other RPSC exams, severely affecting the recruitment calendar and public interest. In contrast, the UGC-NET is held twice yearly, and those affected can appear again in Dec without any prejudice," Sharma argued in court.
United News of India
20-05-2025
- Health
- United News of India
SC upholds Kerala HC's order quashing govt move on Medical Education Corpus Fund
New Delhi, May 19 (UNI) The Supreme Court on Monday upheld a Kerala High Court's judgment that quashed a government order validating the decision to remit to the State the corpus fund created to subsidise medical education for Below Poverty Line (BPL) students in self-financing medical colleges in Kerala. The corpus fund had been formed by remitting a portion of the fees collected from Non-Resident Indian (NRI) students to the State Government. The Supreme Court ruled that such funds should instead be retained by the self-financing institutions themselves, which are entitled to utilize them for subsidising BPL students' education. A Bench, comprising Justices Surya Kant and Nongmeikapam Kotiswar Singh, affirmed that the Kerala High Court was right in setting aside government order passed on June six, 2018. 'The self-financing medical colleges are entitled to retain the fees transferred to the State for the creation of the 'corpus fund' substantially for the purpose of subsidizing the fees charged to BPL students admitted to those colleges,' the Court stated. The issue stemmed from a directive issued by the Kerala Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee, mandating that a corpus fund be created from a portion of the NRI student fees to subsidize BPL students' education. KMCT Medical College had challenged this before the High Court after the Committee, in February 2018, increased NRI fees from Rs 15 lakh to Rs 20 lakh, directing that Rs five lakh be set aside for the corpus fund and remitted to the State. During the pending litigation, the State issued a government order on June six, 2018, validating this directive. However, the High Court ruled that while the Committee could fix fees under Section 8 of the Kerala Medical Education Act, 2017, it had no authority to redirect a portion of such fees for any other purpose. The Court directed that corpus funds already collected be transferred back to the respective colleges, to be held in separate accounts and used solely for aiding economically weaker students. This led to cross-appeals before the Supreme Court by the State, self-financing colleges and NRI students. Citing P A Inamdar versus State of Maharashtra (2005) and Islamic Academy of Education vs State of Karnataka (2003), the Court clarified that while the State may design subsidy mechanisms, the Admission and Fee Regulatory Committee lacks statutory authority to create such corpus funds. 'There is nothing discernible in Section 8A of the 2017 Act that permits the Committee to divert or dictate the utilisation of a part of the fees,' the Bench noted. The Court emphasized that any initiative to support economically weaker students must come through appropriate legislation by the State. The Supreme Court ordered that the corpus fund amounts be returned to the respective colleges within three months. These institutions must maintain a separate account for the corpus fund and utilize it strictly for subsidizing fees of BPL students. Any BPL student who paid more than the subsidized amount is entitled to a refund or fee adjustment in future years. However, the Court clarified that NRI students are not entitled to refunds from the corpus fund, and any pending fees as approved by the Committee must be paid in full within three months. Senior Advocate Jayanth Muth Raj appeared for the Appellants (colleges), while Senior Advocate V Chitambaresh represented the Respondents. The appeals by the State of Kerala and NRI students were dismissed. Appeal by the self-financing medical colleges was allowed in part. The State and Admission Committee may seek account statements from colleges to verify compliance with the judgment. The Supreme Court has reinforced the autonomy of private medical institutions within the legal framework and reiterated the principle that statutory bodies must function within the bounds of their legislative mandates. UNI SNG SS
