<?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 (4) TMI 215 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169813</link>
    <description>A contractual clause permitting termination of a confirmed teacher on notice or payment in lieu, without assigning reasons, was treated as a service condition within the Syndicate&#039;s power and not as disciplinary punishment. The University Code provisions on suspension, removal, dismissal and related safeguards applied only to punitive action for misconduct or similar grounds, not to termination simpliciter under a non-stigmatic contract clause. The notice clause and the Code were therefore not repugnant, and the teacher could not insist on termination only under disciplinary procedure. In a pure contract of personal service, the proper remedy for wrongful termination is damages, not reinstatement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 May 2015 11:28:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=384457" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (4) TMI 215 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169813</link>
      <description>A contractual clause permitting termination of a confirmed teacher on notice or payment in lieu, without assigning reasons, was treated as a service condition within the Syndicate&#039;s power and not as disciplinary punishment. The University Code provisions on suspension, removal, dismissal and related safeguards applied only to punitive action for misconduct or similar grounds, not to termination simpliciter under a non-stigmatic contract clause. The notice clause and the Code were therefore not repugnant, and the teacher could not insist on termination only under disciplinary procedure. In a pure contract of personal service, the proper remedy for wrongful termination is damages, not reinstatement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Apr 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=169813</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>