<?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>2007 (7) TMI 713 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309144</link>
    <description>Reservation for women under the service rules was required to operate as a horizontal reservation, to be applied within each vertical category by first drawing the merit list and then adjusting only the shortfall against the women quota. Women selected on their own merit within a vertical category had to be counted toward that quota, and the balance alone could be filled by further adjustment. Treating the quota as vertical led to excess selection in the general and OBC categories, so the selection process was incorrect to that extent. The Court declined to unsettle appointments already made, but granted limited relief, including appointment and seniority-related relief, to the eligible candidates who should have been selected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Aug 2023 12:33:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=722540" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (7) TMI 713 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309144</link>
      <description>Reservation for women under the service rules was required to operate as a horizontal reservation, to be applied within each vertical category by first drawing the merit list and then adjusting only the shortfall against the women quota. Women selected on their own merit within a vertical category had to be counted toward that quota, and the balance alone could be filled by further adjustment. Treating the quota as vertical led to excess selection in the general and OBC categories, so the selection process was incorrect to that extent. The Court declined to unsettle appointments already made, but granted limited relief, including appointment and seniority-related relief, to the eligible candidates who should have been selected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309144</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>