<?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>2019 (4) TMI 2045 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301216</link>
    <description>The Supreme Court held that candidates who did not file writ petitions before November 17, 1999, were not entitled to appointment upon recalculation of marks excluding bonus marks. This direction does not apply where the principle of res judicata applies. All pending writ petitions and appeals should be decided based on previous judgments, subject to justified condonation of delay. The appeals and pending applications were disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Mar 2022 08:12:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=673325" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 2045 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301216</link>
      <description>The Supreme Court held that candidates who did not file writ petitions before November 17, 1999, were not entitled to appointment upon recalculation of marks excluding bonus marks. This direction does not apply where the principle of res judicata applies. All pending writ petitions and appeals should be decided based on previous judgments, subject to justified condonation of delay. The appeals and pending applications were disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301216</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>