<?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>1982 (3) TMI 258 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169652</link>
    <description>The 1948 Reserve Bank of India Staff Regulations were treated as administrative directions rather than statutory regulations under section 58 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, because the materials did not show the required Central Government sanction or statutory framing. On that footing, the Reserve Bank could modify staff service conditions and seniority arrangements through administrative circulars under its general administrative powers, so long as it remained within the Bank&#039;s charter and did not conflict with any statutory regulation. The common seniority and inter-group mobility scheme was upheld as a rational measure to reduce disparities in promotional opportunities and improve administrative efficiency, and it was found not to violate Articles 14 or 16.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Jun 2015 10:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=383298" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1982 (3) TMI 258 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169652</link>
      <description>The 1948 Reserve Bank of India Staff Regulations were treated as administrative directions rather than statutory regulations under section 58 of the Reserve Bank of India Act, because the materials did not show the required Central Government sanction or statutory framing. On that footing, the Reserve Bank could modify staff service conditions and seniority arrangements through administrative circulars under its general administrative powers, so long as it remained within the Bank&#039;s charter and did not conflict with any statutory regulation. The common seniority and inter-group mobility scheme was upheld as a rational measure to reduce disparities in promotional opportunities and improve administrative efficiency, and it was found not to violate Articles 14 or 16.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Mar 1982 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169652</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>