<?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>2011 (4) TMI 1464 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195513</link>
    <description>An amendment to the eligibility conditions for membership of a State Human Rights Commission was held not to operate retrospectively to dislodge an incumbent appointed under the earlier law or cut short a fixed tenure, absent clear legislative intent. Experience as an Additional District Judge was held not to be interchangeable with experience as a District Judge for the amended statutory eligibility requirement, which had to be read by its plain terms. Non-joinder of the newly appointed member limited the relief available, but it did not bar a declaration that the notification ceasing the incumbent&#039;s office was illegal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 02 Aug 2023 09:41:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=494433" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (4) TMI 1464 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195513</link>
      <description>An amendment to the eligibility conditions for membership of a State Human Rights Commission was held not to operate retrospectively to dislodge an incumbent appointed under the earlier law or cut short a fixed tenure, absent clear legislative intent. Experience as an Additional District Judge was held not to be interchangeable with experience as a District Judge for the amended statutory eligibility requirement, which had to be read by its plain terms. Non-joinder of the newly appointed member limited the relief available, but it did not bar a declaration that the notification ceasing the incumbent&#039;s office was illegal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Apr 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=195513</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>