<?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>2006 (5) TMI 504 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181908</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, directing reconsideration of the promotion of remaining assistants to comply with Rule 47(2) by including past performance in merit assessment. The Court instructed the High Court to determine if such promotions should have retrospective effect, emphasizing adherence to established promotion rules and procedures.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 Oct 2017 16:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=425775" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (5) TMI 504 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181908</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeals, directing reconsideration of the promotion of remaining assistants to comply with Rule 47(2) by including past performance in merit assessment. The Court instructed the High Court to determine if such promotions should have retrospective effect, emphasizing adherence to established promotion rules and procedures.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 May 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181908</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>