<?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>1962 (8) TMI 101 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193046</link>
    <description>Article 30(1) protects the minority&#039;s right to establish and administer educational institutions, subject only to reasonable regulations directed at making the institution effective as an educational institution. Compulsory reservation of seats for Government-nominated teachers, enforced through threatened withdrawal of aid or recognition, substantially controlled admissions and impaired the substance of that right; the measures were therefore invalid to that extent. The challenge under Articles 19(1)(f) and 19(1)(g) failed because the measures neither deprived the petitioners of protected property rights nor prevented them from carrying on a profession, occupation, trade or business.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Jul 2017 09:58:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=480736" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1962 (8) TMI 101 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193046</link>
      <description>Article 30(1) protects the minority&#039;s right to establish and administer educational institutions, subject only to reasonable regulations directed at making the institution effective as an educational institution. Compulsory reservation of seats for Government-nominated teachers, enforced through threatened withdrawal of aid or recognition, substantially controlled admissions and impaired the substance of that right; the measures were therefore invalid to that extent. The challenge under Articles 19(1)(f) and 19(1)(g) failed because the measures neither deprived the petitioners of protected property rights nor prevented them from carrying on a profession, occupation, trade or business.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Aug 1962 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=193046</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>