News UpdatesNEET 2020: Supreme Court Directs NTA To Consider Requests Of Candidates To Furnish Original OMR Sheets LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK3 Dec 2020 8:03 AMShare This – xThe Supreme Court, on Thursday, while refusing to entertain a writ petition filed by some aspirants for admission for undergraduate medical courses seeking quashing of the NEET 2020 results, directed the National Testing Agency to consider representation preferred by them for furnishing the original OMR sheets.Nineteen candidates had approached the Court by filing a writ petition…Your free access to Live Law has expiredTo read the article, get a premium account.Your Subscription Supports Independent JournalismSubscription starts from ₹ 599+GST (For 6 Months)View PlansPremium account gives you:Unlimited access to Live Law Archives, Weekly/Monthly Digest, Exclusive Notifications, Comments.Reading experience of Ad Free Version, Petition Copies, Judgement/Order Copies.Subscribe NowAlready a subscriber?LoginThe Supreme Court, on Thursday, while refusing to entertain a writ petition filed by some aspirants for admission for undergraduate medical courses seeking quashing of the NEET 2020 results, directed the National Testing Agency to consider representation preferred by them for furnishing the original OMR sheets.Nineteen candidates had approached the Court by filing a writ petition under Article 32 contending that the OMR sheets uploaded by the NTA do not tally with the actual answers given by them. They prayed for issuance of several directions including appointment of a High-Powered Committee to examine the complaint regarding the tampering of the OMR sheets. They also challenged the prescribed procedure for challenging the answer key and OMR sheets and for quashing the NEET results. They contended that the errors and absurdities render the NEET examination unequal discriminatory and arbitrary and hence violative of Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution.”More than 15 lakh students have taken the undergraduate examination for the academic year 2020-2021 and even the second round of counselling has been completed. The grievances of individual students cannot be addressed by us in a petition filed under Article 32 of the Constitution of India.”, the bench comprising Justices L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta and Ajay Rastogi said. Any further grievance of the petitioners relating to the procedure prescribed for challenging the answer key and the OMR sheets can be raised by filing a Writ Petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the bench added.Case: MUSKAN SABHARWAL vs. NATIONAL TESTING AGENCYCoram: Justices L. Nageswara Rao, Hemant Gupta and Ajay RastogiCounsel: Sr. Adv Sidharth Luthra ,Sr.Adv. Gopal Shankar Narayanan, Tanwi Dubey, AOR Manju JetleyClick here to Read/Download OrderRead OrderNext Story
The local radio news station in Los Angeles recently reported that the rental rates in this city have reached apocalyptic levels. So it stands to reason the next best step is to purchase a home. Easier said than done, particularly for millennials.At the end of last year my 25-year-old daughter and I were discussing this issue. She and her live-in boyfriend had been exploring the notion, but with the median home price in Los Angeles exceeding $500,000.00, it is completely out of reach for them. Between juggling school loan payoffs and each working in the freelance world of entertainment, saving for a down payment and/or qualifying for a mortgage, in this day and age, is tough. Unlike we baby boomers, the proverbial American Dream of a house for every family with a chicken in every pot feels more fantasy than an inalienable right.Over the last 20 plus years I have watched as the cost of living in the U.S., and more specifically Los Angeles, steadily climbed. It became apparent, without a doubt, that if my daughters (I have two) were going to have a home, it would be up to mom to help them. continue reading » 8SHARESShareShareSharePrintMailGooglePinterestDiggRedditStumbleuponDeliciousBufferTumblr
Intecsea has confirmed securing a contract by ConocoPhillips Australia to provide subsea Front End Engineering Design (FEED) services for subsea scopes of their Barossa development.Barossa is an offshore gas and light condensate field located offshore North Australia, approximately 300km north-northwest of Darwin.Intecsea will provide the FEED engineering for infield rigid flowline system, the gas export pipeline between Barossa and the existing Bayu Undan pipeline, associated dynamic risers and umbilicals, flowline and pipeline end termination structures and subsea tie-in spools.The contract will mainly be executed from Intecsea’s Perth office, with support being provided from other offices including Houston, London, and Delft.The Barossa development concept includes a floating production storage and offloading facility (FPSO), six subsea production wells to be drilled in the initial phase, subsea production system, supporting in-field subsea infrastructure and a gas pipeline to Darwin, all located in Australian Commonwealth waters.A final investment decision is targeted towards the end of 2019 for the field located 300 kilometers north of Darwin.The Barossa joint venturers are ConocoPhillips Australia Barossa Pty Ltd (operator, 37.5%), SK E&S Australia Pty Ltd (37.5%) and Santos Offshore Pty Ltd (25.0%).