Best printers for Home

Best Mixer Grinder

Best wired Earphones

Best 43 Inch TV in India

Best Wi Fi Routers

Best Home Theatre in India

Smart Watch under 5000

Best Laptops for Education

Best Laptop for Students

The <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Supreme Court" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="Supreme Court">Supreme Court</keyword> agreed to hear on Friday a plea seeking <keyword id="20286748" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="postponement" source="keywords">postponement</keyword> of the <keyword id="22147879" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="NEET-PG" source="keywords">NEET-PG</keyword> examination, scheduled for August 11, which claimed that candidates have been allocated cities that are highly inconvenient for them to reach. A bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra on Thursday took note of the submissions of lawyer Anas Tanwir on the issue. The bench said the matter will be listed on Friday. The plea said many candidates have been allocated cities which are highly inconvenient for them to reach. It said the test cities were allotted on July 31 and the specific centres will be declared on August 8. While the allocation of the centres was done to curb malpractices, the plea said due to the paucity of time, it is difficult for the candidates to make arrangements for travel to specific cities. "Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus ...the Respondents (<keyword id="19904021" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="National-Testing-Agency" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="National Testing Agency" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="National Testing Agency">National Testing Agency</keyword>) to reschedule the NEET-PG 2024 examination," stated the plea filed by Vishal Soren. The National Eligibility-cum-Entrance Test (NEET)-Postgraduate exam was initially supposed to be held on June 23. It was postponed by the Union Health Ministry as a "precautionary measure" in the wake of alleged irregularities in certain competitive exams. SEE ALSO:<a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/ola-wants-to-re-enter-the-quick-commerce-business-to-take-on-blinkit-and-swiggy-instamart/articleshow/112364583.cms" target="_blank"></a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/news/ola-wants-to-re-enter-the-quick-commerce-business-to-take-on-blinkit-and-swiggy-instamart/articleshow/112364583.cms" target="_blank">Ola wants to re-enter the quick commerce business to take on Blinkit and Swiggy Instamart</a><a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/finance/banks/news/rbi-mpc-meet-cheque-clearing-time-reduced-upi-limit-increased-for-tax-payment/articleshow/112366099.cms" target="_blank"></a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/finance/banks/news/rbi-mpc-meet-cheque-clearing-time-reduced-upi-limit-increased-for-tax-payment/articleshow/112366099.cms" target="_blank">RBI MPC meet – Cheque clearing time reduced, UPI limit increased for tax payment</a><a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/auto/news/tata-curvv-ev-with-up-to-585-km-range-launched-starting-at-17-49-lakh/slidelist/112342769.cms" target="_blank"></a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/auto/news/tata-curvv-ev-with-up-to-585-km-range-launched-starting-at-17-49-lakh/slidelist/112342769.cms" target="_blank">Tata Curvv EV with up to 585 km range launched starting at ₹17.49 lakh</a>

Supreme Court to hear plea seeking postponement of NEET-PG on Friday

The <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court" source="keywords">Supreme Court</keyword> on Monday issued notice to concerned respondents on the <keyword id="20054502" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="West-Bengal-government" source="keywords">West Bengal government</keyword> plea challenging the <keyword id="19895346" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Calcutta-High-Court" source="keywords">Calcutta High Court</keyword> decision cancelling all Other Backward Caste certificates issued in <keyword id="19896517" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="west-bengal" source="keywords">West Bengal</keyword> after 2010. A bench of Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud with justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra also asked the West Bengal government to file an affidavit explaining the process to determine 77 communities as OBCs. The top court, however, did not stay the Calcutta High Court order but issued notice on West Bengal's application seeking a stay on the order. In the meantime, the top court also asked the government to file an affidavit explaining the process followed for the determination of 77 communities as OBCs. The court sought to know the nature of the survey and the study relied upon the classification of 77 communities as OBCs. The court also sought to know details of the consultation the state government had with the WB Backward Commission prior to including the 77 communities in the OBC list. The court has asked the WB government to file the affidavit within one week. The top court was hearing West Bengal Government challenging Calcutta High Court order. Calcutta HC on May 22 cancelled all <keyword id="20636195" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="OBC-certificates" source="keywords">OBC certificates</keyword> issued in West Bengal after 2010 had directed the West Bengal <keyword id="20779164" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Backward-Classes-Commission" source="keywords">Backward Classes Commission</keyword> to prepare a new list of OBCs in accordance with the 1993 Act. Those who were in the OBC list before 2010 will remain. However, after 2010, OBC nominations have been cancelled. About 5 lakh OBC certificates are set to be cancelled. After 2010, those who have jobs under the OBC quota or are in the process of getting them cannot be excluded from the quota. There will be no impact on their job and they cannot be excluded from the quota.

SC issues notice on plea challenging Calcutta HC decision cancelling all OBC certificates issued in West Bengal after 2010

The <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court" source="keywords">Supreme Court</keyword> on Monday refused to entertain a <keyword id="19957723" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="PIL" source="keywords">PIL</keyword> challenging the government's decision to cancel the UGC-NET examination following alleged <keyword id="20713483" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="question-paper-leak" source="keywords">question paper leak</keyword>. A bench comprising <keyword id="15469242" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chief-Justice-D-Y-Chandrachud" source="Orion">Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud</keyword> and justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra, however, said the dismissal of the PIL does not amount to a decision on the merits of the PIL as it was filed by a lawyer and not by aggrieved students. "Why are you (lawyer) coming? Let the students come here themselves," the CJI told the lawyer, adding "while declining the above PIL, we express nothing on merits". The bench asked advocate Ujjawal Gaur, who has filed the PIL as a petitioner, to focus on some legal matters and leave such issues for aggrieved persons. The plea was filed against the decision of the <keyword id="20018491" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Union-education-ministry" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Union education ministry" meta.hostid="153" meta.entityid="Union education ministry">Union education ministry</keyword> and the <keyword id="19904021" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="National-Testing-Agency" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="National Testing Agency" meta.hostid="153" meta.entityid="National Testing Agency">National Testing Agency</keyword> to cancel the <keyword id="21469389" type="General" weightage="100" keywordseo="UGC-NET-exam" source="keywords">UGC-NET exam</keyword> following inputs that its integrity may have been compromised. The ministry on June 19 had ordered the cancellation of the UGC-NET exam and handed over the matter to the CBI for an investigation. In the plea, Gaur also sought a direction to immediately stay the proposed re-examination of the UGC-NET exam until the CBI completes its inquiry into the <keyword id="20116086" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="paper-leak" source="keywords">paper leak</keyword> allegations. "The petitioner asserts that the decision is not only arbitrary but also unjust, given the recent findings of the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI). "The CBI's investigation brings the fact that the evidence suggesting the paper leak is doctored, thus nullifying the grounds on which the cancellation was based," the plea, filed through advocate Rohit Pandey, said. The petitioner submitted that the "unwarranted" cancellation of the exam has caused significant distress, anxiety, and an unnecessary expenditure of resources for the aspirants who have rigorously prepared for this crucial examination.

Supreme Court refuses to entertain PIL against government decision to cancel UGC-NET exam

Union Minister <keyword id="20150028" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chirag-Paswan" source="keywords">Chirag Paswan</keyword> expressed his disagreement with the <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Supreme Court" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="Supreme Court">Supreme Court</keyword>'s observation on <keyword id="22418374" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="creamy-layer" source="keywords">creamy layer</keyword> among Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes, and said that the <keyword id="22663720" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Lok-Jandhakti-Party" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Lok Jandhakti Party" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="Lok Jandhakti Party">Lok Jandhakti Party</keyword> (Ram Vilas) will be filing a review peition against the ruling. Emphasising that <keyword id="20053971" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Dalit" source="keywords">Dalit</keyword> people in various spheres of life still face <keyword id="21301343" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="untouchability" source="keywords">untouchability</keyword>, Paswan said that the basis of giving <keyword id="19914887" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="reservation" source="keywords">reservation</keyword> to Scheduled Caste is 'untouchability,' so there is no point of creamy layer in it. "We disagree with the observation of the Supreme Court and we have registered this disagreement prominently. We are clear about this that the base of the Scheduled Caste is untouchability. It does not have an educational or economic basis. In such a situation, there can be no provision of creamy layer in it, reservation within the reservation is not correct, because even today the example of a Dalit youth is given who is prevented from riding a mare," Chirag Paswan told reporters on Sunday. "There are many such big names, who are on high posts, but even after they go to the temple, the temple is washed with Ganga water, so even today discrimination takes place based on untouchability... We, LJP (Ram Vilas) are also going to file a <keyword id="20143564" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="review-petition" source="keywords">review petition</keyword> in the Supreme Court regarding this matter," he added. The Supreme Court, in a landmark ruling on Thursday, ruled that states have the power to sub-classify SCs and STs and said that the authority concerned, while deciding if the class is adequately represented, must calculate adequacy based on effective and not quantitative representation. The top court ruled by a majority judgement of 6:1, that sub-classification within the SCs and STs reservation is permissible. As many as six separate opinions were delivered in the case. The judgement was delivered by the seven-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud, which overruled earlier judgement in the EV Chinnaiah matter, which had held that sub-classification was not permissible because SC/STs form homogenous classes. Besides CJI Chandrachud, other judges on the bench were Justices BR Gavai, Vikram Nath, Bela M Trivedi, Pankaj Mithal, Manoj Misra, and Satish Chandra Sharma. Justice Bela M. Trivedi, in a dissenting opinion, said that she disagreed with the majority judgement that sub-classification within the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes is permissible.

We will file review petition against top court's verdict on SC/ST subclassification: Chirag Paswan

New Delhi: The <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="supreme-court" source="keywords">Supreme Court</keyword> on Wednesday said it will hear on September 17 the appeal of US-based creditor Glas Trust Company LLC against a judgment of the <keyword id="19916400" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="nclat" source="keywords">NCLAT</keyword>, which had stayed insolvency proceedings against ed-tech firm BYJU's and approved its Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the <keyword id="19901245" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="bcci" source="keywords">BCCI</keyword>. A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was urged by a battery of lawyers that the plea be heard urgently keeping in mind the subsequent developments in the case. The plea was mentioned by senior advocate NK Kaul, appearing for the ed-tech major, that the case needed to be heard at the earliest. The submission was supported by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, appearing for the BCCI, and senior lawyer Abhishek Singhvi, also appearing for the ed-tech firm. Kaul said another plea in the case has also been filed and that is listed for hearing on September 17 and hence, the present plea be either heard on that day or the hearings in both the cases be advanced to this Friday. "We will hear both the pleas on September 17," the CJI said. Senior advocate Shayam Divan, appearing for the US-based creditor, said let the matters be heard together on September 17. Earlier on August 22, the bench had refused to pass an interim order to ensure that the committee of creditors (CoC) does not hold any meeting in pursuance of the insolvency proceedings against the embattled ed-tech firm. It had listed the plea for a final hearing on August 27. The bench had said the developments, which may take place in the meantime, can be negated if it finds there was no merit in the appeal of the US-based creditor against the judgment of appellate insolvency tribunal NCLAT. The plea was mentioned earlier also on August 20 by Byju's and the BCCI and the top court had then also refused to pass an interim order to restrain the Insolvency Resolution Professional (IRP) from constituting a committee of creditors (CoC) in the insolvency proceedings against the ed-tech firm. In a major setback to Byju's, the top court had on August 14 stayed the verdict of NCLAT, setting aside the insolvency proceedings against the ed-tech major and approving its Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the Indian cricket board. The August 2 verdict of the NCLAT had come as a huge relief for Byju's as it had effectively put its founder Byju Raveendran back in control. The top court, however, had prima facie termed the NCLAT verdict as "unconscionable" and stayed its operation while issuing notices to Byju's and others on the appeal of the ed-tech firm's US-based creditor against the judgment of the insolvency appellate tribunal. The case stemmed from Byju's default on a Rs 158.9 crore payment related to a sponsorship deal with the BCCI. The top court had directed the BCCI to keep a sum of Rs 158 crore it had received from Byju's after a settlement in a separate escrow account till further orders. "Issue notice. Pending further orders there shall be a stay of the impugned order of August 2 of NCLAT. In the meantime, BCCI shall maintain the amount of Rs 158 crore, which shall be realised in pursuance of a settlement, in a separate escrow account until further orders," the bench had said. The NCLAT had approved the Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the BCCI and set aside the insolvency proceedings against Byju's. Byju's had entered into a "Team Sponsor Agreement" with the BCCI in 2019. Under the agreement, the ed-tech firm got exclusive rights to display its brand on the Indian cricket team's kit and some other benefits. Byju's had to pay a sponsorship fee. The company met its obligations till the middle of 2022 but defaulted on subsequent payments of Rs 158.9 crore. After insolvency proceedings were initiated, Byju's entered into a settlement with the BCCI. On July 16, the Bengaluru bench of the <keyword id="19902197" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="national-company-law-tribunal" source="keywords">National Company Law Tribunal</keyword> (NCLT) had admitted 'Think and Learn', Byju's parent company, to the insolvency resolution process on a plea filed by the BCCI over default in payment of outstanding dues of almost Rs 158.9 crore. While suspending the board of the ed-tech firm, the NCLT had appointed an interim resolution professional to run the operations of the company, suspended the company's board of directors, and brought it under moratorium by freezing its assets. The US-based lenders suspected that the settlement amount was being diverted from the credit they had extended to Byju's.

SC to hear plea related to insolvency proceedings against ed-tech firm Byju's on Sept 17

The <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court" source="keywords">Supreme Court</keyword> on Friday agreed to list for an early hearing the appeal of US-based creditor Glas Trust Company LLC against a judgment of the <keyword id="19916400" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="NCLAT" source="keywords">NCLAT</keyword>, which had stayed <keyword id="19965539" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="insolvency-proceedings" source="keywords">insolvency proceedings</keyword> against ed-tech firm <keyword id="19958178" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Byjus" source="keywords">BYJU's</keyword> and approving its Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the <keyword id="19901245" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="BCCI" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="BCCI" meta.hostid="153" meta.entityid="BCCI">BCCI</keyword>. A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra was urged by senior advocate NK Kaul, appearing for the ed-tech major, that the case needed to be heard at the earliest. Kaul said, "The only funding was done by the promoters and today no one has brought any external borrowing. We have to show today how malafide the petition (of US firm) is." "I will get it listed as early as possible," the CJI, who was indisposed and in quarantine for the last few days, said. Senior advocate Kapil Sibal, appearing for the US-based creditor, said it also wanted an early hearing. Earlier on August 22, the bench had refused to pass an interim order to ensure that the committee of creditors (CoC) does not hold any meeting in pursuance of the insolvency proceedings against the embattled ed-tech firm. It had listed the plea for a final hearing on August 27. The bench had said the developments, which may take place in the meantime, can be negated if it finds there was no merit in the appeal of the US-based creditor against the judgment of appellate insolvency tribunal NCLAT. The plea was mentioned earlier also on August 20 by Byju's and the BCCI and the top court had then also refused to pass an interim order to restrain the Insolvency Resolution Professional (IRP) from constituting a committee of creditors (CoC) in the insolvency proceedings against the ed-tech firm. In a major setback to Byju's, the top court had on August 14 stayed the verdict of NCLAT, setting aside the insolvency proceedings against the ed-tech major and approving its Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the Indian cricket board. The August 2 verdict of the NCLAT had come as a huge relief for Byju's as it had effectively put its founder Byju Raveendran back in control. The top court, however, had prima facie termed the NCLAT verdict as "unconscionable" and stayed its operation while issuing notices to Byju's and others on the appeal of the ed-tech firm's US-based creditor against the judgment of the insolvency appellate tribunal. The case stemmed from Byju's default on a Rs 158.9 crore payment related to a sponsorship deal with the BCCI. The top court had directed the BCCI to keep a sum of Rs 158 crore it had received from Byju's after a settlement in a separate escrow account till further orders. "Issue notice. Pending further orders there shall be a stay of the impugned order of August 2 of NCLAT. In the meantime, BCCI shall maintain the amount of Rs 158 crore, which shall be realised in pursuance of a settlement, in a separate escrow account until further orders," the bench had said. The NCLAT had approved the Rs 158.9 crore dues settlement with the BCCI and set aside the insolvency proceedings against Byju's. Byju's had entered into a "Team Sponsor Agreement" with the BCCI in 2019. Under the agreement, the ed-tech firm got exclusive rights to display its brand on the Indian cricket team's kit and some other benefits. Byju's had to pay a sponsorship fee. The company met its obligations till the middle of 2022 but defaulted on subsequent payments of Rs 158.9 crore. After insolvency proceedings were initiated, Byju's entered into a settlement with the BCCI. On July 16, the Bengaluru bench of the National Company Law Tribunal (NCLT) had admitted 'Think and Learn', Byju's parent company, to the insolvency resolution process on a plea filed by the BCCI over default in payment of outstanding dues of almost Rs 158.9 crore. While suspending the board of the ed-tech firm, the NCLT had appointed an interim resolution professional to run the operations of the company, suspended the company's board of directors, and brought it under moratorium by freezing its assets. The US-based lenders suspected that the settlement amount was being diverted from the credit they had extended to Byju's. SEE ALSO: <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/mobile/news/india-beats-the-us-to-emerge-as-the-second-biggest-market-for-5g-smartphones/articleshow/113095322.cms">India beats the US to emerge as the second-biggest market for 5G smartphones</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/mobile/news/apple-iphone-16-to-launch-on-september-9-design-specs-and-everything-we-know-so-far/articleshow/113091114.cms">Apple iPhone 16 to launch on September 9 – design, specs and everything we know so far</a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/stock-market/webstories/shree-tirupati-balajee-agro-trading-ipo-price-band-to-risk-factors-all-you-need-to-know/slidelist/113082663.cms">Shree Tirupati Balajee Agro Trading IPO – Price band to risk factors, all you need to know</a>

Supreme Court agrees to list plea related to insolvency proceedings against ed-tech firm Byju's

The <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court" source="keywords">Supreme Court</keyword> on Tuesday said it has ordered listing of a plea challenging the verdict of the <keyword id="19905533" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Bombay-High-Court" source="keywords">Bombay High Court</keyword> which had upheld a decision of a Mumbai college to impose a ban on wearing of 'hijab', 'burqa' and 'naqab' inside the campus. The high court had on June 26 refused to interfere with the decision of the <keyword id="22185170" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="chembur-trombay-education" source="keywords">Chembur Trombay Education</keyword> Society's N G Acharya and <keyword id="22271323" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="d-k-marathe-college" source="keywords">D K Marathe College</keyword> imposing the ban, saying such rules do not violate students' <keyword id="20068423" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="fundamental-rights" source="keywords">fundamental rights</keyword>. It had said a <keyword id="42035" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="dress-code" source="Orion">dress code</keyword> is meant to maintain discipline which is part of the college's fundamental right to "establish and administer an educational institution". Taking note of submission seeking urgent listing of the appeal, a bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and Justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said it has already assigned a bench for the matter and that it would be listed soon. Lawyer Abiha Zaidi, appearing for petitioners, including Zainab Abdul Qayyum, sought urgent hearing saying the unit tests in the college are likely to commence on Wednesday. The top court is yet to conclusively decide the legality of such diktats issued by educational institutions. A two-judge bench of the top court, on October 13, 2022, had delivered opposing verdicts in the hijab controversy emanating from Karnataka. The then BJP-led state government had imposed a ban on wearing the Islamic head covering in schools there. While Justice Hemant Gupta, since retired, had dismissed the appeals challenging the judgement of the Karnataka High Court which had refused to lift the ban, Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia had held there shall be no restriction on the wearing of hijab anywhere in the schools and colleges of the state. The present controversy stems from the decision of a Mumbai college. The Bombay High Court trashed the plea against the ban and said the dress code was applicable to all students irrespective of religion or caste. The students, who were in the second and third year of the science degree course, had moved the high court, challenging a directive issued by the college imposing a dress code under which students cannot wear a hijab, naqab, burka, stoles, caps and badges on the premises. The students had claimed it was against their fundamental right to practice religion, the right to privacy and right to choice. The college's action was "arbitrary, unreasonable, bad-in-law and perverse", the plea had said. The high court, however, had said it could not see how the prescription of dress code by the college violated Articles 19(1)(a) (freedom of speech and expression) and 25 (freedom to practice religion) of the Constitution. "In our view, the dress code as prescribed cannot be held to violate the petitioners' rights claimed under Article 19(1) (a) and Article 25 of the Constitution of India," the HC had said. The high court had also refused to accept the petitioners' contention that wearing a hijab, naqab and burqa was an essential practice of their religion. "Except for stating that the same constitutes an essential religious practice on the basis of the English translation of Kanz-ul-Iman and Suman Abu Dawud, there is no material placed to uphold the petitioners' contention that donning of hijab and naqab is an essential religious practice. The contention in that regard, therefore, fails," the HC had said. Prescribing a dress code should be seen as an "exercise towards maintaining discipline", and the right to do so flows from the fundamental right to establish and administer an educational institution under Article 19(1)(g) (right to practise any profession or run trade/business) and Article 26 of the Constitution, the HC had said. The dress code was mandatory only within the college premises and the petitioners' freedom of choice and expression was not otherwise affected, it had said.

Supreme Court to hear plea of students against Bombay HC verdict upholding ban on hijab, burqa in college

The <keyword id="19895345" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Supreme-Court" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Supreme Court" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="Supreme Court">Supreme Court</keyword> on Monday refused to entertain a plea seeking postponement of certain papers of the <keyword id="21466151" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Chartered-Accountancy" source="keywords">Chartered Accountancy</keyword> (CA) exams scheduled for May on account of the Lok Sabha polls. A bench comprising Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud and justices JB Pardiwala and Manoj Misra said the <keyword id="20230355" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="Institute-of-Chartered-Accountants-of-India" source="keywords" meta.keywordsubtype="org" meta.entityname="Institute of Chartered Accountants of India" meta.hostid="261" meta.entityid="Institute of Chartered Accountants of India">Institute of Chartered Accountants of India</keyword> (<keyword id="6364696" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="icai" source="Orion">ICAI</keyword>) has not fixed the examination on election dates. It noted that the general elections to the Lok Sabha are to be held on May 7 and 13 and no exam has been scheduled for May 6 and May 12. Altering the examination date would disrupt the extensive arrangements already in place for the conduct of the examination and it could result in "grave injustice for some students", it said. The scheduling of exams pertains to "policy decisions", it said while refusing to entertain the PIL. "But weighing the importance of the right to vote we have examined the position of candidates who shall be appearing for exams and would also need to vote. 591 centres are there and no exams on polling dates. At this stage when 4 lakh plus students have enrolled, any relief at this stage would result in grave prejudice," the CJI said. The Chartered Accountancy (CA) exams are scheduled to start from May 2 and continue till May 17. The plea sought that the exams scheduled for May 8 and May 14 be postponed to other dates as elections are going to be held in some states on May 7 and May 13. The Delhi High Court, on April 8, has refused to postpone the <keyword id="21424300" type="General" weightage="20" keywordseo="CA-exams" source="keywords">CA exams</keyword> while dealing with another plea. The high court had said it was surprised that such a request was made before it and termed the petition as "bereft of substance". The counsel representing the ICAI had submitted that rescheduling the exam in the second week of June would throw the exercise into disarray and added that due care has been taken to ensure that no exams are scheduled on the dates when polling will be held. SEE ALSO:<a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/mobile/webstories/upcoming-smartphones-launching-in-india-in-may-2024/slidelist/109682003.cms" target="_blank"></a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/mobile/webstories/upcoming-smartphones-launching-in-india-in-may-2024/slidelist/109682003.cms" target="_blank">Upcoming smartphones launching in India in May 2024</a><a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/auto/webstories/ultraviolette-f77-mach-2-electric-sports-bike-launched-in-india-starting-at-2-99-lakh/slidelist/109615934.cms" target="_blank"></a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/business/auto/webstories/ultraviolette-f77-mach-2-electric-sports-bike-launched-in-india-starting-at-2-99-lakh/slidelist/109615934.cms" target="_blank">Ultraviolette F77 Mach 2 electric sports bike launched in India starting at ₹2.99 lakh</a><a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/jiocinema-introduces-new-ad-free-premium-plans-starting-at-29/articleshow/109581033.cms" target="_blank"></a> <a href="https://www.businessinsider.in/tech/news/jiocinema-introduces-new-ad-free-premium-plans-starting-at-29/articleshow/109581033.cms" target="_blank">An Ambani disruption in OTT: At just ₹1 per day, you can now enjoy ad-free content on JioCinema</a>

You Searched For "manoj misra" and got 8 results