<?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>2018 (9) TMI 1932 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285529</link>
    <description>The court allowed the petitioner&#039;s writ petition challenging an order based on lack of computer education qualification, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment as an LDC within 60 days if vacancies were available. The court emphasized the importance of considering qualifications broadly and providing fair opportunities for candidates with relevant educational backgrounds, in line with established legal precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 16 Jan 2020 14:11:45 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=600460" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1932 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285529</link>
      <description>The court allowed the petitioner&#039;s writ petition challenging an order based on lack of computer education qualification, directing the respondents to consider the petitioner for appointment as an LDC within 60 days if vacancies were available. The court emphasized the importance of considering qualifications broadly and providing fair opportunities for candidates with relevant educational backgrounds, in line with established legal precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285529</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>