SC refuses interim relief to NEET-UG 2025 candidates hit by MP power outage, says counselling won't be stalled
The candidates had petitioned the top court against a July 14 order of the Madhya Pradesh High Court refusing to order a re-test for them. A division bench comprising Justices PS Narasimha and AS Chandurkar posted the pleas for resumed hearing on Friday.
The bench said it will not stay the counselling process for eligible candidates post Neet-UG results, which has been notified as noted by one of the petitioners' counsels. Justice Narasimha, speaking for the bench, clarified that individual grievances will be dealt with by the court, but the counselling process will not be stayed as it would adversely affect thousands of candidates.
On June 30, a single bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court had directed the National Testing Agency to conduct re-test of the Neet-UG 2025 for candidates affected by power outage at the centres in Indore and Ujjain, observing that the petitioners were put at a disadvantage for no fault of theirs. The single bench also observed that the counselling process will be subject to the re-test. However, last week, a division bench of the Madhya Pradesh High Court set aside the single bench decision. It took note of an expert committee report, which opined that even though there was power outage at some centres, there was sufficient natural light enabling the candidates to take the test.
Aggrieved, some of the students moved the Supreme Court.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
9 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Brazil Supreme Court orders house arrest of former president Jair Bolsonaro
Brazil's Supreme Court on Monday issued an house arrest order for former President Jair Bolsonaro, who is standing trial for allegedly plotting a coup, in a move that could escalate tensions with the administration of U.S. President Donald Trump. Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro's press representative confirmed the house arrest order and restrictions on using a cell phone.(AP) Justice Alexandre de Moraes said in his decision that the right-wing firebrand did not comply with judicial restraining orders imposed on him last month. Moraes also banned Bolsonaro from receiving visits, with exceptions for lawyers and people authorized by the court, and use of a cell phone either directly or through third parties. The restrictions on Bolsonaro were imposed over allegations that he courted the interference of Trump, who recently tied steep new tariffs on Brazilian goods to what he called a "witch hunt" against Bolsonaro. The former Brazilian leader is facing charges that he conspired with dozens of his allies to overturn his 2022 electoral loss. Bolsonaro's press representative confirmed the house arrest order and restrictions on using a cell phone.
Indian Express
9 minutes ago
- Indian Express
Pollution boards can seek damages, bank guarantees for future, says Supreme Court
In a significant decision aimed at empowering pollution control boards, the Supreme Court Monday held that they can seek compensation for restitution of damages already caused by polluting entities or demand bank guarantees to prevent any potential future environmental damage. A bench of Justices P S Narasimha and Manoj Misra set aside the Delhi HC Division Bench order which said the Boards are 'not empowered to levy compensatory damages in exercise of powers under Section 33A of the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1974 and Section 31A of the Air (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Act, 1981 on the ground.' The HC held that such levy can be made only by courts, after taking cognisance of offences specified under the Acts. The SC said, 'having considered the principles that govern our environmental laws and on interpretation of Sections 33A and 31A of the Water and Air Acts, we are of the opinion that that the Division Bench of the High Court was not correct in restrictively reading powers of the Boards. We are of the opinion that these regulators in exercise of these powers can impose and collect, as restitutionary or compensatory damages, fixed sum of monies or require furnishing bank guarantees as an ex-ante measure towards potential or actual environmental damage.' The Delhi Pollution Control Board had approached the SC against the HC judgement which quashed the show cause notices issued by the Board to some residential complexes, commercial complexes and shopping malls which were allegedly constructed and were operating without obtaining the mandatory 'consent to establish' and 'consent to operate' under the Water Act and Air Act. The SC judgment said, 'The Board's powers under Section 33A of the Water Act and Section 31A of the Air Act have to be read in light of the legal position on the application of the Polluter Pays principle… This means that the State Board cannot impose environmental damages in case of every contravention or offence under the Water Act and Air Act. It is only when the State Board has made a determination that some form of environmental damage or harm has been caused by the erring entity, or the same is so imminent, that the State Board must initiate action under' the provisions. It directed that 'the powers must be exercised as per procedure laid down by subordinate legislation incorporating necessary principles of natural justice, transparency and certainty.' The court said that 'given their broad statutory mandate and the significant duty towards public health and environmental protection the Boards must have the power and distinction to decide the appropriate action against a polluting entity. It is essential that the Boards function effectively and efficiently by adopting such measures as is necessary in a given situation. The Boards can decide whether a polluting entity needs to be punished by imposition of penalty or if the situation demands immediate restoration of the environmental damage by the polluter or both.' The bench said, 'Our firm view is that remedial powers or restitutionary directives are a necessary concomitant of both the fundamental rights of citizens who suffer environmental wrongs and an equal concomitant of the duties of a statutory regulator… The State's 'endeavour to protect and improve the environment' will be partial, if it does not encompass a duty to restitute.' It said that 'of all the duties imposed under Article 51A (fundamental duties), the obligation to conserve and protect water and air, is perhaps the most significant, amidst our climate change crisis. The Water Act and the Air Act institutionalised all efforts and actions that need to be taken to protect air that we breathe and water that we consume by creating the Pollution Control Boards. These Boards functioning as our environment regulators are expected to act with institutional foresight by evolving necessary policy perspectives and action plans.'
The Hindu
39 minutes ago
- The Hindu
BJP accuses Rahul Gandhi of making ‘immature' comments against Armed Forces
The Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) on Monday stated that Leader of Opposition in Lok Sabha Rahul Gandhi's credibility is at stake, citing the Supreme Court's remarks during the hearing of a criminal defamation case related to his December 2022 comments on Indo-China border tensions. At a press conference, BJP spokesperson Gaurav Bhatia said: 'Such immature, anti-Army, and demoralising statements made without any evidence or facts, especially when our Army was engaged in the Galwan incident, raise serious questions. Why does Rahul Gandhi make such statements? This is a big question. And it is a question about his credibility.' 'The question arises: Does India deserve a more responsible and better Leader of Opposition? As a Leader of the Opposition, who has taken an oath under the Constitution to safeguard the sovereignty of our country, is he destroying that very sovereignty? ...is he helping the nations which are inimical to our country? Is he demoralising the brave Indian armed forces?' the BJP leader asked. Quoting the Supreme Court's remarks, Mr. Bhatia alleged that this was not the first time Mr. Gandhi had displayed 'such an anti-India' mindset. He referred to another defamation case involving comments by the Congress leader about V.D. Savarkar. 'We all know that the commission-hungry Congress failed to procure Rafale jets for 10 years. Prime Minister Narendra Modi made sure that the Air Force received these aircraft. Displaying similar immaturity, Rahul Gandhi used inappropriate language for the Prime Minister. Subsequently, the Supreme Court's decision affirmed that the addition of Rafale jets strengthened the Air Force and was in India's national interest,' Mr. Bhatia added.
