<?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>1998 (2) TMI 582 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171239</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal challenging the appointment of Assistant Commissioners of Labour as Judges of the Labour Court, affirming that such appointments must comply with constitutional provisions to uphold judicial independence. The Court emphasized that Labour Court Judges are part of the judicial service and should be appointed in accordance with Article 235, after consultation with the State Public Service Commission and the High Court as per Article 234. The High Court&#039;s decision to set aside the appointment notification and direct compliance with constitutional provisions was upheld, with no order as to costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2016 13:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=390247" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (2) TMI 582 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171239</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal challenging the appointment of Assistant Commissioners of Labour as Judges of the Labour Court, affirming that such appointments must comply with constitutional provisions to uphold judicial independence. The Court emphasized that Labour Court Judges are part of the judicial service and should be appointed in accordance with Article 235, after consultation with the State Public Service Commission and the High Court as per Article 234. The High Court&#039;s decision to set aside the appointment notification and direct compliance with constitutional provisions was upheld, with no order as to costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Feb 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=171239</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>