<?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>1971 (12) TMI 113 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192695</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court&#039;s judgment. The Commission was justified in calling for fresh applications and conducting examinations for all vacancies under the amended Rule 5. The judgment clarified the application of Art. 16 and the rights of applicants in light of the invalidated rules, emphasizing the need for a fair and lawful selection process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 13 Jun 2017 17:06:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=472109" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1971 (12) TMI 113 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192695</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court&#039;s judgment. The Commission was justified in calling for fresh applications and conducting examinations for all vacancies under the amended Rule 5. The judgment clarified the application of Art. 16 and the rights of applicants in light of the invalidated rules, emphasizing the need for a fair and lawful selection process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Dec 1971 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192695</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>