<?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>2019 (8) TMI 1916 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458601</link>
    <description>The SC allowed the appeal and set aside the HC&#039;s direction requiring the bank to provide appointment to the respondent as Agricultural Field Officer. The respondent applied for the post requiring B.Sc. (Agro-Forestry) qualification but possessed only B.Sc. (Forestry). Although the Ministry later issued a corrigendum including B.Sc. (Forestry) as equivalent qualification, this change was made after the selection process had concluded. The SC held that courts cannot provide retrospective equivalence to qualifications not originally prescribed in the recruitment notification, as this would prejudice other eligible candidates who were prevented from applying initially.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Aug 2019 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=777007" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1916 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458601</link>
      <description>The SC allowed the appeal and set aside the HC&#039;s direction requiring the bank to provide appointment to the respondent as Agricultural Field Officer. The respondent applied for the post requiring B.Sc. (Agro-Forestry) qualification but possessed only B.Sc. (Forestry). Although the Ministry later issued a corrigendum including B.Sc. (Forestry) as equivalent qualification, this change was made after the selection process had concluded. The SC held that courts cannot provide retrospective equivalence to qualifications not originally prescribed in the recruitment notification, as this would prejudice other eligible candidates who were prevented from applying initially.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458601</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>