<?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>2005 (9) TMI 656 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186914</link>
    <description>The recruitment rules for primary school teachers treated JBT/PTTC or an equivalent training qualification as the relevant standard, because the scheme was designed for teaching at the primary stage and for training suited to young children. B.Ed. was not treated as equivalent, as its training content was directed to higher classes. The rules also expressly barred extra credit for higher academic qualification, and administrative circulars could not override that statutory scheme. The operative effect was a qualification-based preference for specialised primary teacher training, with no additional advantage for a general higher degree.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 Apr 2024 12:17:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=443630" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (9) TMI 656 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186914</link>
      <description>The recruitment rules for primary school teachers treated JBT/PTTC or an equivalent training qualification as the relevant standard, because the scheme was designed for teaching at the primary stage and for training suited to young children. B.Ed. was not treated as equivalent, as its training content was directed to higher classes. The rules also expressly barred extra credit for higher academic qualification, and administrative circulars could not override that statutory scheme. The operative effect was a qualification-based preference for specialised primary teacher training, with no additional advantage for a general higher degree.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=186914</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>