<?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>1972 (9) TMI 151 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178523</link>
    <description>A statutory bar on removal of a municipal employee by an authority subordinate to the appointing authority cannot be defeated by delegation of functions. Under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, the employee was deemed appointed under the Act, with the General Manager (Transport) as the appointing authority for the post. Although powers were delegated to the Assistant General Manager, delegation could not alter rank or status, and the relevant subordination remained one of authority, not merely administrative convenience. The concept of agency could not override the express statutory safeguard, so removal by the subordinate officer was illegal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Feb 2016 11:21:51 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=415745" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1972 (9) TMI 151 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178523</link>
      <description>A statutory bar on removal of a municipal employee by an authority subordinate to the appointing authority cannot be defeated by delegation of functions. Under the Delhi Municipal Corporation Act, the employee was deemed appointed under the Act, with the General Manager (Transport) as the appointing authority for the post. Although powers were delegated to the Assistant General Manager, delegation could not alter rank or status, and the relevant subordination remained one of authority, not merely administrative convenience. The concept of agency could not override the express statutory safeguard, so removal by the subordinate officer was illegal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Sep 1972 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=178523</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>