<?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>2017 (12) TMI 95 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351826</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the appointment of the respondent as Special Director, CBI, dismissing the writ petition challenging the appointment. The Court found no illegality in the appointment process, emphasizing the unanimous decision of the Selection Committee based on relevant considerations. The appointment was deemed legal, with no fault found in the recommendations made by the Committee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 Dec 2017 10:09:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=498393" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 95 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351826</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the appointment of the respondent as Special Director, CBI, dismissing the writ petition challenging the appointment. The Court found no illegality in the appointment process, emphasizing the unanimous decision of the Selection Committee based on relevant considerations. The appointment was deemed legal, with no fault found in the recommendations made by the Committee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351826</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>