<?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 (9) TMI 826 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386058</link>
    <description>A university one-year part-time Certificate Course in Bengali did not satisfy the language requirement under Rule 5(c) of the West Bengal School Service Commission Rules, 2007 or the advertisement for appointment as Assistant Teacher in a Bengali-medium school. The prescribed standard required the relevant medium language at secondary, higher secondary, graduation, or a later higher level of education, and no document showed that the certificate course was equivalent to a post-higher-secondary qualification. The Supreme Court held that the High Court exceeded the limits of judicial review by substituting its view for a plausible administrative interpretation of the eligibility condition. The candidate was therefore ineligible, and the High Court&#039;s interference was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Sep 2019 07:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=588160" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 826 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386058</link>
      <description>A university one-year part-time Certificate Course in Bengali did not satisfy the language requirement under Rule 5(c) of the West Bengal School Service Commission Rules, 2007 or the advertisement for appointment as Assistant Teacher in a Bengali-medium school. The prescribed standard required the relevant medium language at secondary, higher secondary, graduation, or a later higher level of education, and no document showed that the certificate course was equivalent to a post-higher-secondary qualification. The Supreme Court held that the High Court exceeded the limits of judicial review by substituting its view for a plausible administrative interpretation of the eligibility condition. The candidate was therefore ineligible, and the High Court&#039;s interference was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386058</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>