<?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>2010 (12) TMI 1333 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299003</link>
    <description>The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 was treated as a welfare statute imposing enforceable obligations to provide wage employment, unemployment allowance, social audit, grievance redressal, audit, and supervisory control. The Court found the material insufficient to rebut allegations of irregularities, diversion of funds, poor record maintenance, and ineffective implementation, and held that the statutory machinery was not being used effectively. Relying on the constitutional value of livelihood under Article 21 and the Act&#039;s accountability framework, it required the Union of India and the State to file detailed compliance affidavits, answer issues on fund release and utilisation, appoint responsible officers, address complaints, and consider investigation, with continuing judicial oversight.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Nov 2021 16:03:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=662440" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (12) TMI 1333 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299003</link>
      <description>The National Rural Employment Guarantee Act, 2005 was treated as a welfare statute imposing enforceable obligations to provide wage employment, unemployment allowance, social audit, grievance redressal, audit, and supervisory control. The Court found the material insufficient to rebut allegations of irregularities, diversion of funds, poor record maintenance, and ineffective implementation, and held that the statutory machinery was not being used effectively. Relying on the constitutional value of livelihood under Article 21 and the Act&#039;s accountability framework, it required the Union of India and the State to file detailed compliance affidavits, answer issues on fund release and utilisation, appoint responsible officers, address complaints, and consider investigation, with continuing judicial oversight.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Dec 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299003</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>