Just a moment...

βœ•
Top
Help
πŸš€ New: Section-Wise Filter βœ•

1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β€” now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available

2. New: β€œIn Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.

Try both these filters in Case Laws β†’

×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedbackβœ•

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search βœ•
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
β•³
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
βœ•
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close βœ•
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
In Favour Of: New
---- In Favour Of ----
  • ---- In Favour Of ----
  • Assessee
  • In favour of Assessee
  • Partly in favour of Assessee
  • Revenue
  • In favour of Revenue
  • Partly in favour of Revenue
  • Appellant / Petitioner
  • In favour of Appellant
  • In favour of Petitioner
  • In favour of Respondent
  • Partly in favour of Appellant
  • Partly in favour of Petitioner
  • Others
  • Neutral (alternate remedy)
  • Neutral (Others)
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:

---------------- For section wise search only -----------------


Statute Type: ?
This filter alone wont work. 1st select a statute > section from below filter
New
---- All Statutes----
  • ---- All Statutes ----
Sections: ?
Select a statute to see the list of sections here
New
---- All Sections ----
  • ---- All Sections ----

Accuracy Level ~ 90%



TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2026
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
Sort By: ?
In Sort By 'Default', exact matches for text search are shown at the top, followed by the remaining results in their regular order.
RelevanceDefaultDate
TMI Citation
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.

        Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.

        <h1>Supreme Court: No Advance Increments for Typists with LL.B. Degree</h1> The Supreme Court denied typists advance increments upon acquiring an LL.B. degree, overturning the High Court's decision. Steno-Typists were granted ... - Issues Involved:1. Entitlement of Typists to advance increments on acquiring LL.B. degree.2. Entitlement of Steno-Typists to advance increments on acquiring LL.B. degree.3. Relevance of LL.B. degree to the posts held by the employees.4. Application of Article 14 of the Constitution of India in granting increments.Detailed Analysis:1. Entitlement of Typists to Advance Increments on Acquiring LL.B. Degree:The primary issue in the Civil Appeal arising out of SLP(c) No. 10167/97 was whether typists working in the Subordinate Courts were entitled to advance increments upon acquiring an LL.B. degree. The appellants contended that the acquisition of an LL.B. degree was not relevant to the post of typist, as previously decided by the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Md. Azamathulla Khan v. State of Andhra Pradesh, 1996(1)ALT432. The High Court, however, had granted the advance increment to the writ petitioners, stating that the post of typist was equivalent to that of Junior Assistant, and hence, the typists could not be denied the increment. The Supreme Court disagreed with the High Court's reasoning, emphasizing that the earlier judgment in Md. Azamathulla Khan's case had become final and that the acquisition of an LL.B. degree was not relevant to the post of typist. Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and dismissed W.P. No. 20512/96.2. Entitlement of Steno-Typists to Advance Increments on Acquiring LL.B. Degree:The other five Civil Appeals involved the entitlement of Steno-Typists to advance increments on acquiring an LL.B. degree. The respondents argued that the judgment in Md. Azamathulla Khan's case had implicitly recognized the relevance of an LL.B. degree for those taking dictations, which included Steno-Typists. The Supreme Court agreed with this interpretation, noting that the relevant passage in Md. Azamathulla Khan's case referred to those taking down dictations of judgments, which applied to Steno-Typists. The Court directed the inclusion of Steno-Typists in G.O. No. 142 dated 3.4.96 and upheld their entitlement to advance increments, subject to verification of whether they had already received an increment for another higher qualification.3. Relevance of LL.B. Degree to the Posts Held by the Employees:The Supreme Court examined the relevance of the LL.B. degree to the posts held by the employees, as stipulated in G.O. Ms. No. 182 dated 17.7.87. The Court acknowledged that the acquisition of higher qualifications should be relevant to the post held by the employee. In the case of typists, the Court upheld the earlier judgment that an LL.B. degree was not relevant. However, for Steno-Typists, the Court found that the degree was relevant, as it contributed to their efficiency in taking dictations of judgments.4. Application of Article 14 of the Constitution of India in Granting Increments:The High Court had applied Article 14 of the Constitution of India to grant increments to typists, arguing that denying them the benefit while granting it to Junior Assistants would violate the principle of equality. The Supreme Court, however, held that the application of Article 14 was not appropriate in this context, as the earlier judgment in Md. Azamathulla Khan's case had already established that the LL.B. degree was not relevant to the post of typist. The Court emphasized that the distinction based on the relevance of the qualification was valid and reasonable.Conclusion:The Supreme Court allowed the appeal concerning the typists, setting aside the High Court's judgment and denying them the advance increments. For the Steno-Typists, the Court upheld their entitlement to the increments, subject to verification of their qualifications, and directed their inclusion in the relevant Government Order. The Court also suggested that the High Court on the administrative side reconsider the relevance of the LL.B. degree for various posts and recommend any necessary changes to the Government.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found