<?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>1967 (2) TMI 100 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180325</link>
    <description>Service disciplinary proceedings may be initiated against an IAS officer for acts done while functioning as Commissioner under the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 where the conduct bears a reasonable connection with service and reflects on integrity, good faith, or devotion to duty. The Commissioner&#039;s statutory position as a corporation sole did not create immunity from discipline. Even if sanctioning leases under section 29 involved a quasi-judicial function, disciplinary scrutiny was not barred where the allegation concerned abuse of power, gross recklessness, or disregard of mandatory conditions, and the availability of appeal or revision under the Act did not exclude such action. Suspension and initiation of proceedings under the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 were treated as validly instituted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Jan 2018 11:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=420912" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1967 (2) TMI 100 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180325</link>
      <description>Service disciplinary proceedings may be initiated against an IAS officer for acts done while functioning as Commissioner under the Madras Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments Act, 1951 where the conduct bears a reasonable connection with service and reflects on integrity, good faith, or devotion to duty. The Commissioner&#039;s statutory position as a corporation sole did not create immunity from discipline. Even if sanctioning leases under section 29 involved a quasi-judicial function, disciplinary scrutiny was not barred where the allegation concerned abuse of power, gross recklessness, or disregard of mandatory conditions, and the availability of appeal or revision under the Act did not exclude such action. Suspension and initiation of proceedings under the All India Services (Discipline and Appeal) Rules, 1955 were treated as validly instituted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Feb 1967 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=180325</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>