<?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>2001 (5) TMI 984 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309733</link>
    <description>Service rules governing promotional seniority required inter se seniority in the Senior Clerk cadre to be counted from the date of regular promotion after due process, not from ad hoc officiation. A promotion made without the prescribed suitability test was outside the rule-based selection scheme and could not be treated as regular promotion. In the absence of any rule permitting retrospective regularisation, later regular promotion did not relate back to the earlier ad hoc date for seniority purposes. The principle applied to appointees or promotees outside the rules, and the ad hoc period could not be added for seniority in the promoted cadre.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2023 18:01:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=726553" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2001 (5) TMI 984 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309733</link>
      <description>Service rules governing promotional seniority required inter se seniority in the Senior Clerk cadre to be counted from the date of regular promotion after due process, not from ad hoc officiation. A promotion made without the prescribed suitability test was outside the rule-based selection scheme and could not be treated as regular promotion. In the absence of any rule permitting retrospective regularisation, later regular promotion did not relate back to the earlier ad hoc date for seniority purposes. The principle applied to appointees or promotees outside the rules, and the ad hoc period could not be added for seniority in the promoted cadre.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 May 2001 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309733</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>