<?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>2022 (11) TMI 334 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429910</link>
    <description>Vacancy in the office of Chairman of a Regional Council was treated as distinct from mere temporary absence: Regulation 117(2), read with Regulation 119(2), required election of another member for the remaining term, and that elected member could validly preside over the meeting. The meeting was therefore not invalid merely because the Vice-Chairman did not chair it. The writ challenge to the election was also held not maintainable because Regulation 114(4) provided a specific internal election-dispute remedy, the matter raised disputed questions of fact, and the challenger had not participated in the election. The election of the office bearers was restored.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2022 09:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=695157" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (11) TMI 334 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429910</link>
      <description>Vacancy in the office of Chairman of a Regional Council was treated as distinct from mere temporary absence: Regulation 117(2), read with Regulation 119(2), required election of another member for the remaining term, and that elected member could validly preside over the meeting. The meeting was therefore not invalid merely because the Vice-Chairman did not chair it. The writ challenge to the election was also held not maintainable because Regulation 114(4) provided a specific internal election-dispute remedy, the matter raised disputed questions of fact, and the challenger had not participated in the election. The election of the office bearers was restored.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429910</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>