<?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>2000 (8) TMI 1150 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456265</link>
    <description>The SC dismissed review petitions challenging the dilution of promotion standards for SC/ST candidates, asserting that a subsequent Constitution Bench&#039;s opinion is irrelevant for review. The judgment affirmed that dilution is permissible solely for SC/ST candidates, not when general candidates are involved, supported by Article 16(4-A) of the Constitution.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2024 17:27:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=759797" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (8) TMI 1150 - Supreme Court (LB)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456265</link>
      <description>The SC dismissed review petitions challenging the dilution of promotion standards for SC/ST candidates, asserting that a subsequent Constitution Bench&#039;s opinion is irrelevant for review. The judgment affirmed that dilution is permissible solely for SC/ST candidates, not when general candidates are involved, supported by Article 16(4-A) of the Constitution.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Aug 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=456265</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>