<?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>2003 (10) TMI 667 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194330</link>
    <description>The appeals against the writ appeals were dismissed due to delay, while the appeals against the Single Judge&#039;s order in the contempt petition and the Division Bench&#039;s orders in related appeals were allowed. The Court emphasized that the Contempt Court lacked jurisdiction to grant substantive relief and urged the State Government to consider employee regularisation sympathetically, despite legal constraints.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 05 Jul 2024 12:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=488180" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (10) TMI 667 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194330</link>
      <description>The appeals against the writ appeals were dismissed due to delay, while the appeals against the Single Judge&#039;s order in the contempt petition and the Division Bench&#039;s orders in related appeals were allowed. The Court emphasized that the Contempt Court lacked jurisdiction to grant substantive relief and urged the State Government to consider employee regularisation sympathetically, despite legal constraints.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 Oct 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=194330</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>