<?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>1991 (3) TMI 397 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278993</link>
    <description>Statutory seniority rules fixing seniority by date of appointment controlled the cadre, and executive orders could not substitute a different basis by treating Emergency Commissioned Officers and Short Service Regular Commissioned Officers as earlier entrants; such a change required amendment of the rules under the constitutional rule-making power. The orders were therefore invalid and created no enforceable seniority right. The discrimination claim also failed because officers in medical and engineering services were not similarly situated: they remained in the same field in Army and civilian service and their rules had been amended, whereas the petitioners entered a non-technical service governed by unamended rules. Parity was thus unavailable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2019 18:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=560307" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (3) TMI 397 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278993</link>
      <description>Statutory seniority rules fixing seniority by date of appointment controlled the cadre, and executive orders could not substitute a different basis by treating Emergency Commissioned Officers and Short Service Regular Commissioned Officers as earlier entrants; such a change required amendment of the rules under the constitutional rule-making power. The orders were therefore invalid and created no enforceable seniority right. The discrimination claim also failed because officers in medical and engineering services were not similarly situated: they remained in the same field in Army and civilian service and their rules had been amended, whereas the petitioners entered a non-technical service governed by unamended rules. Parity was thus unavailable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Mar 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278993</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>