<?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>1980 (11) TMI 173 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298236</link>
    <description>Senioriy rules for District and Sessions Judges were held to be framable by the Governor under Article 309, but their application remains subject to the High Court&#039;s constitutional control under Article 235. The quota fixed for recruitment was held to govern initial appointment only and could not be converted into a rota for confirmation. Confirmation of direct recruits before completion of normal probation required exceptional circumstances in each individual case; absent such justification, premature confirmation and rotation-based seniority were not sustained. As a result, seniority had to be refixed without applying rotation at confirmation, and the impugned administrative orders were quashed to the extent they conflicted with these principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2021 15:22:36 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=659093" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1980 (11) TMI 173 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298236</link>
      <description>Senioriy rules for District and Sessions Judges were held to be framable by the Governor under Article 309, but their application remains subject to the High Court&#039;s constitutional control under Article 235. The quota fixed for recruitment was held to govern initial appointment only and could not be converted into a rota for confirmation. Confirmation of direct recruits before completion of normal probation required exceptional circumstances in each individual case; absent such justification, premature confirmation and rotation-based seniority were not sustained. As a result, seniority had to be refixed without applying rotation at confirmation, and the impugned administrative orders were quashed to the extent they conflicted with these principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 1980 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298236</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>