<?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>1990 (4) TMI 309 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306953</link>
    <description>Compulsory retirement under Rule 74(b)(ii) of the Bihar Service Code must be exercised bona fide in public interest and cannot serve as a disguise for punishment. The form of the order is not decisive; where the surrounding record shows that it rests on allegations of misconduct, grave financial irregularities, or a pre-judged adverse report, the Court may lift the veil and examine its real character. If the true basis is misconduct, the order is punitive in substance and attracts Article 311(2) protection. An order based on collateral considerations and lacking fairness is arbitrary and contrary to natural justice; the stated conclusion was that the retirement order was illegal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Mar 2023 14:10:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=707188" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1990 (4) TMI 309 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306953</link>
      <description>Compulsory retirement under Rule 74(b)(ii) of the Bihar Service Code must be exercised bona fide in public interest and cannot serve as a disguise for punishment. The form of the order is not decisive; where the surrounding record shows that it rests on allegations of misconduct, grave financial irregularities, or a pre-judged adverse report, the Court may lift the veil and examine its real character. If the true basis is misconduct, the order is punitive in substance and attracts Article 311(2) protection. An order based on collateral considerations and lacking fairness is arbitrary and contrary to natural justice; the stated conclusion was that the retirement order was illegal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 1990 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=306953</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>