<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2009 (2) TMI 332 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75501</link>
    <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, ruling that the petitioner was not entitled to the relief sought. It held that the decision to withdraw the petitioner&#039;s recommendation, approved by the Chief Justice of India and based on the Intelligence Bureau&#039;s report, was not subject to judicial review. The court emphasized the importance of consultation with the Chief Justice of India as a safeguard against arbitrariness and bias in judicial appointments.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 20 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113766" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (2) TMI 332 - KERALA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75501</link>
      <description>The court dismissed the writ petition, ruling that the petitioner was not entitled to the relief sought. It held that the decision to withdraw the petitioner&#039;s recommendation, approved by the Chief Justice of India and based on the Intelligence Bureau&#039;s report, was not subject to judicial review. The court emphasized the importance of consultation with the Chief Justice of India as a safeguard against arbitrariness and bias in judicial appointments.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Feb 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75501</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>