Ph.D and M.Phil 2019 - Apply Now | WorkShop on Machine Learning with Python by MICROSOFT TECHNOLOGY Associate | RIMT UNIVERSITY TO UNDERTAKE A PROJECT “DESINNO - DESIGN AND CAPACITY BUILDING IN INDIA” | INNSPIRE-2019 by School of Hospitality Management | workshop on kinesiological taping | Lohri celebration in RIMT University | 148 COMPANIES VISITED RIMT UNIVERSITY FOR PLACEMENT IN 2018 | Ph.D/M.Phil July 2018 Batch, Successfully Completed One Semester Coursework | National Workshop on Data Analysis thorough SPSS | TECHNOPHILIA - TECHFEST 2018 | RIMT UNIVERSITY HOLDS 2ND NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON “ADVANCES IN MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH 2018” | One Week Workshop on IoT | Electrical Engineering student design Unmanned Aircraft | World Tourism Day 2018 | UPCOMING NATIONAL CONFERENCE ON RECENT ADVANCES IN MULTIDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH on 2nd NOVEMBER 2018 | Research on one of the most important battle of the world “Battle of Saragarhi” |

  • Advocate Harshvinder Singh Cheema Honour By RIMT University Chancellor
  • Advocate Amardeep Singh Dharni Honour By Chancellor of RIMT University
  • Moot Court Held by RIMT University for Law Students
  • RIMT University School of Law organized Moot Court
  • Court Room of School of Legal Studies At RIMT University

RIMT University School of Law organized Moot Court

MANDI GOBINDGARH, 13 FEBRUARY, 2017

A Moot Court was held in the “Court Room” of School of Legal Studies, RIMT University, on the topic “Whether Election Manifestos should be made legally binding or not”. The session was Presided by Advocate Amardeep Singh Dharni, former president of Bar Council of Fatehgarh Sahib and counsel for the Petitioner was Advocate Harshvinder Singh Cheema and the counsel for the Respondent was Deepak Bector. The petitioner contended that Election manifestos should be made legally binding and gave examples from Law of Torts, Law of Contract and Law of Evidence and of the grievances suffered by people because of alluring promises made by the political parties to support his contention. On the other hand the respondent contended that political parties do there best to fulfill the promises but due to some financial and social constraints they are unable to do so. It was held that a manifesto should not be regarded as an agreement under contract or as a bond, signed, sealed and delivered and public should act wisely before choosing anyone and the guidelines of the Supreme Court in Mithilesh Kumar Pandhey v/s Election Commission of India should be followed.