<?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>2013 (8) TMI 1197 - Supreme Court</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460685</link>
    <description>Compassionate appointment remains an exception to the constitutional norm of equal public employment and is meant only to relieve immediate financial distress in a bereaved family. It is not a vested right, so entitlement depends on the governing scheme in force at the time the claim is considered. Where the later scheme expressly directs that pending applications be dealt with under the new regime providing ex-gratia relief, the applicant cannot insist on consideration under the earlier scheme merely because the death occurred before the change. A court cannot order appointment contrary to mandatory scheme terms, and the claim had to be assessed only under the new scheme.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 11 Feb 2025 11:18:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=796773" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (8) TMI 1197 - Supreme Court</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460685</link>
      <description>Compassionate appointment remains an exception to the constitutional norm of equal public employment and is meant only to relieve immediate financial distress in a bereaved family. It is not a vested right, so entitlement depends on the governing scheme in force at the time the claim is considered. Where the later scheme expressly directs that pending applications be dealt with under the new regime providing ex-gratia relief, the applicant cannot insist on consideration under the earlier scheme merely because the death occurred before the change. A court cannot order appointment contrary to mandatory scheme terms, and the claim had to be assessed only under the new scheme.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 07 Aug 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=460685</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>