<?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>1976 (11) TMI 190 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156887</link>
    <description>The court directed the State Government to prepare a new seniority list based on the judgment&#039;s principles. Promotions during 1960-62 were validated, but excess promotions post-1966 must be adjusted. The appeal was allowed, modifying the High Court&#039;s judgment. The court stressed the importance of streamlining judicial processes and modernizing court management to prevent prolonged litigation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Aug 2014 09:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=173913" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (11) TMI 190 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156887</link>
      <description>The court directed the State Government to prepare a new seniority list based on the judgment&#039;s principles. Promotions during 1960-62 were validated, but excess promotions post-1966 must be adjusted. The appeal was allowed, modifying the High Court&#039;s judgment. The court stressed the importance of streamlining judicial processes and modernizing court management to prevent prolonged litigation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Nov 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=156887</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>