<?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>1998 (11) TMI 693 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285687</link>
    <description>Rule 27 of the Orissa Education Rules, 1991 requires the Government to nominate a President for the Governing Body on relevant and reasoned consideration of the institution&#039;s educational interests and the nominee&#039;s suitability. The provision is directed to promoting an academic environment, so the nominating authority must assess factors connected with the institution&#039;s educational atmosphere before making the choice. On the materials considered, there was no meaningful discussion or basis in the file supporting the nomination, and the selection appeared to have been made without regard to relevant considerations. The impugned nomination was therefore held unsustainable and quashed to that extent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 23 Jun 2025 17:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=601127" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1998 (11) TMI 693 - ORISSA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285687</link>
      <description>Rule 27 of the Orissa Education Rules, 1991 requires the Government to nominate a President for the Governing Body on relevant and reasoned consideration of the institution&#039;s educational interests and the nominee&#039;s suitability. The provision is directed to promoting an academic environment, so the nominating authority must assess factors connected with the institution&#039;s educational atmosphere before making the choice. On the materials considered, there was no meaningful discussion or basis in the file supporting the nomination, and the selection appeared to have been made without regard to relevant considerations. The impugned nomination was therefore held unsustainable and quashed to that extent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Sun, 08 Nov 1998 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=285687</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>