<?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>1980 (8) TMI 210 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272490</link>
    <description>Temporary Assistant Engineers appointed for long duration through the prescribed process, after Public Service Commission consultation and completion of probation and formalities, were treated as holding the post in a substantive capacity, so their officiating service counted toward seniority. Rule 23 was held to govern seniority by the date of appointment, but confirmation was not the decisive test because it is only an uncertain administrative event and not the sole marker of status. The seniority list was therefore set aside and a fresh list directed on the principle that regular substantive appointment, not confirmation alone, determines seniority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Jan 2022 15:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=519304" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (8) TMI 210 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272490</link>
      <description>Temporary Assistant Engineers appointed for long duration through the prescribed process, after Public Service Commission consultation and completion of probation and formalities, were treated as holding the post in a substantive capacity, so their officiating service counted toward seniority. Rule 23 was held to govern seniority by the date of appointment, but confirmation was not the decisive test because it is only an uncertain administrative event and not the sole marker of status. The seniority list was therefore set aside and a fresh list directed on the principle that regular substantive appointment, not confirmation alone, determines seniority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Aug 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272490</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>