<?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>1976 (11) TMI 199 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183960</link>
    <description>Administrative promotion instructions requiring 10 years&#039; experience for promotion to Assistant Commissioner were modified to 8 years through consistent executive practice because they were not statutory rules and the term &quot;ordinarily&quot; allowed flexibility. The Departmental Promotion Committee was required to determine the field of choice by running seniority, exclude unfit officers, and assess the remainder by merit categories; no threshold merit-based selection or inter se reranking within categories was required. Provisional ad hoc promotions conferred no seniority or future-selection rights, so eligibility was determined on the date of the Committee&#039;s consideration under the revised seniority list.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 05 Nov 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 27 Jun 2016 12:48:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=432991" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1976 (11) TMI 199 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183960</link>
      <description>Administrative promotion instructions requiring 10 years&#039; experience for promotion to Assistant Commissioner were modified to 8 years through consistent executive practice because they were not statutory rules and the term &quot;ordinarily&quot; allowed flexibility. The Departmental Promotion Committee was required to determine the field of choice by running seniority, exclude unfit officers, and assess the remainder by merit categories; no threshold merit-based selection or inter se reranking within categories was required. Provisional ad hoc promotions conferred no seniority or future-selection rights, so eligibility was determined on the date of the Committee&#039;s consideration under the revised seniority list.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 05 Nov 1976 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=183960</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>