<?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>1985 (4) TMI 317 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168898</link>
    <description>The High Court dismissed the challenge to the seniority list post-reamalgamation, leading to an appeal. The court ordered the restoration of the appellants&#039; original seniority, quashing the existing list. Future promotions are to follow the revised seniority order, emphasizing its importance. The Railway administration must assign seniority accordingly and readjust promotions if necessary. The appeal was allowed with costs awarded to the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Apr 2015 12:06:24 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=380446" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1985 (4) TMI 317 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168898</link>
      <description>The High Court dismissed the challenge to the seniority list post-reamalgamation, leading to an appeal. The court ordered the restoration of the appellants&#039; original seniority, quashing the existing list. Future promotions are to follow the revised seniority order, emphasizing its importance. The Railway administration must assign seniority accordingly and readjust promotions if necessary. The appeal was allowed with costs awarded to the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Apr 1985 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=168898</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>