The Delhi High Court has directed the government to sanction extraordinary leave to a doctor in its service so that he can pursue a Super-Speciality DNB course in cardiology, holding that interdicting his higher education would violate his valuable rights. Justice Jasmeet Singh balanced the employer’s interest in the doctor’s five-year service bond by securing it through an indemnity undertaking and an undated cheque for Rs 61 lakh, rather than denying the leave.
The Andhra Pradesh High Court has dismissed a plea by an MDS student seeking to continue his course, holding that under the Dental Council of India’s Master of Dental Surgery Course Regulations, 2017, the course must be completed within a maximum of six years from the date of admission, a limit the petitioner could not meet on any view. The Court noted that his attendance and examination record was also deficient, and found no ground to interfere.
Hearing SASTRA University’s plea against eviction from government land in Thanjavur, the Supreme Court asked Tamil Nadu to consider accepting alternate land, or its market value, rather than demolishing an academic building, calling the State’s insistence on eviction ‘obstinate’. The Court said it would have ‘thrown out’ a commercial encroacher, but the land housed an educational institution, and questioned why the State’s open-air jail project had stalled since 1985. The State sought time for instructions.
Hearing a petition on educational standards, the Supreme Court has held that no private university shall be allowed to be run as a profit-making institution, and has directed a wide-ranging disclosure exercise, requiring universities and colleges, through the Union and the States, to file audited accounts, admission and fee details, faculty and class-allotment records and grievance data on affidavit. It imposed Rs 5 lakh costs on unrepresented respondents and transferred a Delhi schools-safety matter to itself.
The Supreme Court issued notice to CBSE on a plea by a Saudi Arabia-based student seeking declaration of his Class XII Improvement Examination result. Concerned about the impact on his higher education opportunities, the Court directed urgent consideration, observing that the matter concerns the student’s academic future and admissions.
