Find a Lawyer

AMIR-FEROZ SHAMSI AND ANOTHER versus INSTITUTION OF BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Applicants to the Comprehensive Examination of Article 2 (3) institutions demanded that the compulsory examination be illegal and discriminatory, it was illegal and had no effect that they had already instituted. I was enrolled in and qualified in. A good number of courses could not prevent me from appearing in the rest of the courses and could not sit in the comprehensive examination. The institute's position was that once by the institute. The policy decision was taken which was a legislative body, on the quality of education in the higher interest, it was applied immediately. And all such students, including the applicant, were formally informed of the change in eligibility criteria prior to the inspection of such courses, in spite of the applicants' required target set under the laws of the applicants Despite failing to obtain the Institute, the applicants should not have been allowed to sit in the comprehensive test as it would neither be fair nor fair, nor would it be appropriate to interfere in the affairs nor the institute's action. Institutes to intervene in matters within a particular domain Was supported by a legal authority placed on the Academic Board and applicants did not realize that there was no scope for the court to regulate board business advocate from Kashmir lawyer