https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241788 The court dismissed the petition, finding that the Reward Committee had duly considered the petitioner's case in compliance with the previous court order. There was no evidence of wrongful exercise of discretion or discrimination, and the petitioner failed to establish any violation of Article 14 or procedural lapses warranting judicial intervention. The court emphasized that the reward is discretionary and not a guaranteed right, and the Committee's decision aligned with policy guidelines. en-us Wed, 06 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 01 Jan 2014 15:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241788 The court dismissed the petition, finding that the Reward Committee had duly considered the petitioner's case in compliance with the previous court order. There was no evidence of wrongful exercise of discretion or discrimination, and the petitioner failed to establish any violation of Article 14 or procedural lapses warranting judicial intervention. The court emphasized that the reward is discretionary and not a guaranteed right, and the Committee's decision aligned with policy guidelines. Case-Laws Customs Wed, 06 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241788