<?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>2005 (2) TMI 887 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272964</link>
    <description>A statutory selection scheme that allocates candidates to a specific college and subject did not permit later interchange of postings after non-joining, because failure to join within the stipulated time triggered cancellation by operation of law and no express power of mutual transfer existed. The Court also treated the writ as vitiated by deliberate suppression of material facts, including non-disclosure of cancellation and other relevant placement details, and found that interim relief had been obtained on a misleading record. Relief was additionally refused because the affected candidate was a necessary party but had not been impleaded. The interim order was vacated, costs were imposed, and criminal contempt proceedings were initiated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 May 2018 16:05:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=521817" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 887 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272964</link>
      <description>A statutory selection scheme that allocates candidates to a specific college and subject did not permit later interchange of postings after non-joining, because failure to join within the stipulated time triggered cancellation by operation of law and no express power of mutual transfer existed. The Court also treated the writ as vitiated by deliberate suppression of material facts, including non-disclosure of cancellation and other relevant placement details, and found that interim relief had been obtained on a misleading record. Relief was additionally refused because the affected candidate was a necessary party but had not been impleaded. The interim order was vacated, costs were imposed, and criminal contempt proceedings were initiated.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272964</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>