<?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>2004 (4) TMI 615 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189474</link>
    <description>Mandatory statutory service regulations governed promotion to Assistant Executive Engineer, and executive instructions could not override the prescribed eligibility criteria for feeder categories. The regulations framed under the Act set distinct qualifying service requirements for Junior Engineers and Draftsmen, and those norms remained binding because they had not been challenged. Even where executive instructions may apply generally in the absence of a fixed quota, they cannot render statutory eligibility conditions redundant or substitute pay-scale based preference for the regulatory scheme. The promotion panel challenge therefore failed, and promotions had to be assessed only against the statutory qualification requirements.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Jan 2017 17:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=454877" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 615 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189474</link>
      <description>Mandatory statutory service regulations governed promotion to Assistant Executive Engineer, and executive instructions could not override the prescribed eligibility criteria for feeder categories. The regulations framed under the Act set distinct qualifying service requirements for Junior Engineers and Draftsmen, and those norms remained binding because they had not been challenged. Even where executive instructions may apply generally in the absence of a fixed quota, they cannot render statutory eligibility conditions redundant or substitute pay-scale based preference for the regulatory scheme. The promotion panel challenge therefore failed, and promotions had to be assessed only against the statutory qualification requirements.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 15 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=189474</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>