<?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>2001 (4) TMI 908 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172288</link>
    <description>Expiry of the limitation period for instituting court-martial proceedings does not, by itself, bar termination of service under Section 19 read with Rule 14 of the Army Rules. The statutory scheme permits such action where the competent authority, on the material before it, finds court-martial to be inexpedient or impracticable and further retention undesirable; &quot;impracticable&quot; is not confined to physical impossibility and remains subject to judicial review for mala fides, irrelevant considerations, or abuse of power. The Court preferred Major Dharam Pal Kukrety and declined to treat Major Radha Krishan as laying down the correct rule on this point.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Jul 2025 16:14:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=393641" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (4) TMI 908 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172288</link>
      <description>Expiry of the limitation period for instituting court-martial proceedings does not, by itself, bar termination of service under Section 19 read with Rule 14 of the Army Rules. The statutory scheme permits such action where the competent authority, on the material before it, finds court-martial to be inexpedient or impracticable and further retention undesirable; &quot;impracticable&quot; is not confined to physical impossibility and remains subject to judicial review for mala fides, irrelevant considerations, or abuse of power. The Court preferred Major Dharam Pal Kukrety and declined to treat Major Radha Krishan as laying down the correct rule on this point.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172288</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>