<?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>2003 (12) TMI 684 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309532</link>
    <description>Contemporaneous records such as transfer orders, joining reports and arrears payments supported the teacher&#039;s claim of service, and the absence of a produced appointment letter or termination order did not displace that evidence. On the applicable statutory takeover of basic education, her service was treated as transferred by operation of law to the Basic Shiksha Parishad. The salary claim was not barred by limitation because no termination or dismissal order was shown, so salary accrued as a continuing monthly claim and gave rise to a continuing cause of action. The High Court&#039;s grant of salary for the preceding three years before superannuation on the revised pay scale was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Sep 2023 10:45:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=725452" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2003 (12) TMI 684 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309532</link>
      <description>Contemporaneous records such as transfer orders, joining reports and arrears payments supported the teacher&#039;s claim of service, and the absence of a produced appointment letter or termination order did not displace that evidence. On the applicable statutory takeover of basic education, her service was treated as transferred by operation of law to the Basic Shiksha Parishad. The salary claim was not barred by limitation because no termination or dismissal order was shown, so salary accrued as a continuing monthly claim and gave rise to a continuing cause of action. The High Court&#039;s grant of salary for the preceding three years before superannuation on the revised pay scale was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Dec 2003 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309532</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>