Created byFuzzy Cloud

Legislation

Indian Medical Council Act

10 Supreme Court judgments cite this Act.

OMBIR SINGH AND OTHERS ETC. ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER ETC. ETC.

1992 INSC 18830 July 1992Dismissed

The petitioners, doctors who had passed MBBS, challenged the Uttar Pradesh government's rule that required a minimum of 50% marks for general candidates and 40% for SC/ST candidates in the Post‑Graduate Medical Entrance Examination (PGMEE) 1992. They argued that the rule left 217 of 535 seats vacant and violated Articl

STATE OF MAHARASHTRAversusMINOO NOAZER KAVARANA & ORS.

1989 INSC 13824 April 1989Appeal(s) allowed

The Supreme Court examined the State of Maharashtra's policy for MBBS admissions in Bombay's municipal and government medical colleges, which allocated 70% of the remaining seats after the All India quota and Article 15 reservations to local Bombay students and 30% to students from elsewhere in the state. The Bombay Hi

THE CENTRAL BOARD OF SECONDARY EDUCATION AND ANR.versusT. K. RANGARAJAN AND ORS.

2018 INSC 109122 November 2018Leave Granted & Allowed

The Central Board of Secondary Education (CBSE) appealed against a Madras High Court order that awarded four grace marks for each of 49 mistranslated Tamil questions in the NEET‑UG 2018 exam, benefitting about 24,000 candidates. The High Court had held that the Tamil translations were ambiguous and that the students la

MR.'X'versusHOSPITAL Z

1998 INSC 37421 September 1998Dismissed

The appellant, a doctor who tested HIV‑positive, had his status disclosed by Hospital Z when he was about to marry Ms. Y, leading to social ostracism. He filed a consumer complaint seeking damages for breach of medical confidentiality and violation of his right to privacy under Article 21. The Supreme Court held that t

MARTIN F. D'SOUZAversusMOHD. ISHFAQ

2009 INSC 19717 February 2009Appeal(s) allowed

The appellant, a nephrologist, treated a patient with chronic renal failure, severe urinary and blood infections, and high urea levels. He prescribed Amikacin, a potent antibiotic, after culture sensitivity showed resistance to other drugs, and warned the patient to stop it when tinnitus appeared. The patient continued

DR. AJAY KUMAR AGRAWAL AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1990 INSC 35916 November 1990

The petitioners challenged the Uttar Pradesh Government’s decision to fix the internship cut‑off date as 31 December 1990 and to allow candidates who had not completed their house‑manship to sit for the post‑graduate medical selection exam and be admitted, contrary to earlier Supreme Court directions and the Indian Med

T.M.A. PAI FOUNDATION AND ORS. ETC.versusSTATE OF KARNATAKA AND ORS. ETC

1996 INSC 8609 August 1996Disposed off

The Supreme Court, hearing numerous interlocutory applications in the T.M.A. Pai Foundation matter, clarified that the fee structures it had fixed for the academic years 1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96 are confined to those years only and are not refundable. It ordered that the fee order of 11 August 1995, applicable to 1

DR. R.K. GOYALversusSTATE OF U.P. AND ORS.

1996 INSC 14375 December 1996Appeal(s) allowed

Dr. R.K. Goyal was appointed on an ad‑hoc basis as a lecturer in orthopaedics in a Uttar Pradesh medical college in 1983 without the three‑years teaching experience that the Public Service Commission later stipulated in its advertisement. The appointment was subsequently regularised under the Uttar Pradesh Regularisati

STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ORS.versusK. M. RAMONA PERHAR

1994 INSC 3492 September 1994Appeal(s) allowed

The respondent, KM Ramona Perhar, obtained admission to a private medical college in Karnataka in 1990 and sought a transfer to a government medical college in Uttar Pradesh in 1992. The Uttar Pradesh Government rejected the request based on its policy of not allowing out‑of‑state transfers. The Allahabad High Court is

Search Indian case law

Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.

Search by issue, statute, judge or citationSign in to search