<?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 (9) TMI 569 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188308</link>
    <description>The SC set aside the HC&#039;s decision to appoint the respondent based on sympathy, reinforcing the primacy of legal rights, statutory provisions, and established principles in recruitment. The appeal was allowed, and although the respondent&#039;s appointment was invalidated, no recovery was ordered for the period worked.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Feb 2024 16:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=449169" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (9) TMI 569 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188308</link>
      <description>The SC set aside the HC&#039;s decision to appoint the respondent based on sympathy, reinforcing the primacy of legal rights, statutory provisions, and established principles in recruitment. The appeal was allowed, and although the respondent&#039;s appointment was invalidated, no recovery was ordered for the period worked.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Sep 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=188308</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>