<?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>2007 (2) TMI 710 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292869</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the Food Corporation of India (FCI) could not refuse the compassionate appointment of the son after accepting the conditional offer of voluntary retirement made by the employee. FCI was directed to appoint the son within two months as per the High Court&#039;s order, without any entitlement to monetary or other benefits for the delay in issuing the appointment offer.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Jan 2021 10:22:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=632678" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (2) TMI 710 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292869</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, emphasizing that the Food Corporation of India (FCI) could not refuse the compassionate appointment of the son after accepting the conditional offer of voluntary retirement made by the employee. FCI was directed to appoint the son within two months as per the High Court&#039;s order, without any entitlement to monetary or other benefits for the delay in issuing the appointment offer.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292869</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>