<?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>1980 (2) TMI 264 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174057</link>
    <description>Article 30(1) protects the autonomy of minority educational institutions in internal administration, but the State may impose regulatory measures that secure fair procedure, educational standards and orderly management without transferring effective control to an outside authority. Provisions requiring prior approval for dismissal, removal, reduction in rank or termination of teachers, together with an appellate mechanism favouring the teacher, were treated as impermissibly intrusive and invalid in their application to minority institutions. By contrast, provisions regulating suspension pending inquiry, the duration of suspension, retrenchment tied to governmental orders, and the mode and timing of salary payment were treated as valid regulatory measures and sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2015 12:52:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=399197" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (2) TMI 264 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174057</link>
      <description>Article 30(1) protects the autonomy of minority educational institutions in internal administration, but the State may impose regulatory measures that secure fair procedure, educational standards and orderly management without transferring effective control to an outside authority. Provisions requiring prior approval for dismissal, removal, reduction in rank or termination of teachers, together with an appellate mechanism favouring the teacher, were treated as impermissibly intrusive and invalid in their application to minority institutions. By contrast, provisions regulating suspension pending inquiry, the duration of suspension, retrenchment tied to governmental orders, and the mode and timing of salary payment were treated as valid regulatory measures and sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 Feb 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=174057</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>