<?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>1926 (10) TMI 5 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306773</link>
    <description>Municipal election powers under the rules must be exercised by the designated authority with proper authentication, and a special order dispensing with nomination and objection procedures is ineffective unless lawfully made. The election notice rule was construed to require at least three days&#039; advance notice of the election date, because the object is to inform voters and candidates and preserve the right to nominate. An ineffective notification cannot lawfully trigger the election process or bypass nomination safeguards. The election notified for the stated date was therefore treated as illegal, and restraint on holding an election without a valid notification and the required notice was warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 1926 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Feb 2023 18:24:26 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=705577" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1926 (10) TMI 5 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306773</link>
      <description>Municipal election powers under the rules must be exercised by the designated authority with proper authentication, and a special order dispensing with nomination and objection procedures is ineffective unless lawfully made. The election notice rule was construed to require at least three days&#039; advance notice of the election date, because the object is to inform voters and candidates and preserve the right to nominate. An ineffective notification cannot lawfully trigger the election process or bypass nomination safeguards. The election notified for the stated date was therefore treated as illegal, and restraint on holding an election without a valid notification and the required notice was warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 1926 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306773</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>