<?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 (1) TMI 966 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172392</link>
    <description>Article 31A(1)(b) protects a statutory takeover of textile undertaking management when it operates as a finite interim measure pending nationalisation, rather than an indefinite acquisition of ownership. The statutory scheme, including its purpose and structure, supports treatment of management takeover as transitional. Inclusion of undertakings in a statutory schedule does not violate Article 14 where the classification rationally advances rehabilitation, protection of public funds and workers&#039; interests, with economic legislation receiving presumptive validity and legislative latitude. Protection under Article 31A(1)(b) also defeats an Article 19(1)(g) challenge; direct management takeover may remain reasonable as a public-interest economic measure.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Aug 2015 16:58:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=394090" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (1) TMI 966 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172392</link>
      <description>Article 31A(1)(b) protects a statutory takeover of textile undertaking management when it operates as a finite interim measure pending nationalisation, rather than an indefinite acquisition of ownership. The statutory scheme, including its purpose and structure, supports treatment of management takeover as transitional. Inclusion of undertakings in a statutory schedule does not violate Article 14 where the classification rationally advances rehabilitation, protection of public funds and workers&#039; interests, with economic legislation receiving presumptive validity and legislative latitude. Protection under Article 31A(1)(b) also defeats an Article 19(1)(g) challenge; direct management takeover may remain reasonable as a public-interest economic measure.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jan 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172392</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>