<?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>1970 (5) TMI 70 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196736</link>
    <description>A supervisory writ of certiorari lies where a statutory authority acts on a patent misconstruction of the governing Act, and an administrative or university resolution may be annulled only if it is contrary to the Act or Statute. The Statutory qualifications for the professorial post, as continued under section 58, did not require a Master&#039;s degree in the specific subject, and the revised advertisement merely aligned eligibility with the Statute. Approval for direct recruitment had already been obtained, the Commission&#039;s recommendation remained valid despite the experts&#039; non-presence at interviews, and the Syndicate&#039;s correction of the draft minutes reflected its actual decision. The Chancellor therefore had no jurisdiction to annul the proceedings, and the High Court&#039;s quashing order was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:39:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499595" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1970 (5) TMI 70 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196736</link>
      <description>A supervisory writ of certiorari lies where a statutory authority acts on a patent misconstruction of the governing Act, and an administrative or university resolution may be annulled only if it is contrary to the Act or Statute. The Statutory qualifications for the professorial post, as continued under section 58, did not require a Master&#039;s degree in the specific subject, and the revised advertisement merely aligned eligibility with the Statute. Approval for direct recruitment had already been obtained, the Commission&#039;s recommendation remained valid despite the experts&#039; non-presence at interviews, and the Syndicate&#039;s correction of the draft minutes reflected its actual decision. The Chancellor therefore had no jurisdiction to annul the proceedings, and the High Court&#039;s quashing order was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 May 1970 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=196736</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>