<?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>2019 (4) TMI 880 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378436</link>
    <description>The Court upheld the decision of the learned Single Judge to grant regularization of service to the respondent, who had been denied pension due to lack of Employment Exchange sponsorship. The Court found the State&#039;s stance inconsistent as colleagues of the respondent were regularized without such sponsorship. The Single Judge&#039;s order for regularization was affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed without costs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Apr 2019 15:16:32 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=567070" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 880 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378436</link>
      <description>The Court upheld the decision of the learned Single Judge to grant regularization of service to the respondent, who had been denied pension due to lack of Employment Exchange sponsorship. The Court found the State&#039;s stance inconsistent as colleagues of the respondent were regularized without such sponsorship. The Single Judge&#039;s order for regularization was affirmed, and the appeal was dismissed without costs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 18 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378436</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>