<?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>1981 (8) TMI 235 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173411</link>
    <description>Regulation 5(5) of the India Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 requires the Selection Committee to record reasons when proposing supersession of a State Police Service officer. A general note stating only that the officer&#039;s record was not sufficient for appointment at that stage is not a valid reason, because it does not disclose the material relied on or the rational nexus between that material and the conclusion reached. In the service context, this safeguard supports Articles 14 and 16 by preventing arbitrariness. A stock or mechanical note therefore does not satisfy the duty to give reasons, and a select list based on such a recommendation cannot sustain reversion.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 Sep 2015 11:16:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=397348" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1981 (8) TMI 235 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173411</link>
      <description>Regulation 5(5) of the India Police Service (Appointment by Promotion) Regulations, 1955 requires the Selection Committee to record reasons when proposing supersession of a State Police Service officer. A general note stating only that the officer&#039;s record was not sufficient for appointment at that stage is not a valid reason, because it does not disclose the material relied on or the rational nexus between that material and the conclusion reached. In the service context, this safeguard supports Articles 14 and 16 by preventing arbitrariness. A stock or mechanical note therefore does not satisfy the duty to give reasons, and a select list based on such a recommendation cannot sustain reversion.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 20 Aug 1981 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=173411</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>