<?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>2023 (11) TMI 1304 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458603</link>
    <description>Recruitment eligibility conditions ordinarily must be met by the last date for applications, and any relaxation must be expressly reserved and publicly notified; a post-deadline relaxation without fresh publicity was invalid. The prescribed diploma qualification could not be expanded by a supposed ambiguity where the recruitment framework required recognition under the governing rules, and clarification could not substitute for a proper change in criteria. Higher or different qualifications could not be treated as equivalent absent an express rule or authorised determination. An employer was also not bound to fill every advertised vacancy, and recruitment under amended rules could proceed under the later regime. The ratio emphasises fairness and equality in public employment under Articles 14 and 16.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 08 Nov 2024 19:56:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=777005" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (11) TMI 1304 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458603</link>
      <description>Recruitment eligibility conditions ordinarily must be met by the last date for applications, and any relaxation must be expressly reserved and publicly notified; a post-deadline relaxation without fresh publicity was invalid. The prescribed diploma qualification could not be expanded by a supposed ambiguity where the recruitment framework required recognition under the governing rules, and clarification could not substitute for a proper change in criteria. Higher or different qualifications could not be treated as equivalent absent an express rule or authorised determination. An employer was also not bound to fill every advertised vacancy, and recruitment under amended rules could proceed under the later regime. The ratio emphasises fairness and equality in public employment under Articles 14 and 16.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458603</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>