<?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>1991 (4) TMI 469 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460668</link>
    <description>Seniority in the same cadre was held to depend on the date of initial entry into service, not on a later retrospective promotion that would prejudice members already appointed. Promotee Assistant Engineers could not be deemed senior to direct recruits by relating promotions back to an earlier date when they were not in the cadre. The quota arrangement did not authorise altering the vested seniority of direct recruits already serving in Bihar Engineering Service, Class II. The impugned government orders were therefore invalid.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Feb 2025 10:35:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=796514" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1991 (4) TMI 469 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460668</link>
      <description>Seniority in the same cadre was held to depend on the date of initial entry into service, not on a later retrospective promotion that would prejudice members already appointed. Promotee Assistant Engineers could not be deemed senior to direct recruits by relating promotions back to an earlier date when they were not in the cadre. The quota arrangement did not authorise altering the vested seniority of direct recruits already serving in Bihar Engineering Service, Class II. The impugned government orders were therefore invalid.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Apr 1991 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460668</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>