Income-tax Contingent Employee's Union, Income-tax Office, Jodhpur and Jagdish Solanki V. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India and Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Paota, C-Road, Jodhpur

CW/10798/2016

AI Insights

The case involves the Income-tax Contingent Employee's Union and an individual member, Jagdish Solanki, as petitioners, against the Union of India and the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax as respondents. The petition challenged a CAT order that directed the union to supply names of affected casual laborers for bonus payments from 2010-2011 onwards, without addressing the specific request for interest on these arrears. The petitioners argued that their request for interest was overlooked, while the respondents pointed out that related matters had been previously addressed in another application, which the petitioners had also contested unsuccessfully. The High Court of Rajasthan dismissed the writ petition, supporting the CAT's decision and process for handling the bonus claims.

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 819153 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 06-12-2016
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: OA 365/2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: SUNIL BHANDARI
• Assessee Lawyers: T C GUPTA
• Keywords: Bonus; Casual Labourers; Central Administrative Tribunal; Income Tax Contingent Employee's Union; Jodhpur

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR. .. D.B. CIVIL WRIT NO. 10798 / 2016. 1. Income-tax Contingent Employee’s Union, Income-tax Office, Jodhpur (Association of casual labours of Income- tax, Rajasthan Jodhpur). 2. Jagdish Solanki S/o Shri Lal Chand, aged about 40 years R/o Babu Laxman Singh Colony, outside Third Pole, Mahamandir, Jodhpur – 342 001, (A member of the Income-tax Contingent Employee’s Union). ----Petitioners V E R S U S 1. Union of India, through the Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, Government of India, New Delhi – 110 001. 2. Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Paota, C-Road, Jodhpur – 342 010. ----Respondents __________________________________________________ For Petitioners : Mr. T.C. Gupta. For Respondents : Mr. Sunil Bhandari. __________________________________________________ HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANGEET LODHA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK MAHESHWARI Judgment / Order Per Hon’ble Lodha, J. 06/12/2016 (2 of 4 ) [CW-10798/2016] BY THE COURT: 1. This petition is directed against the order dated 12th May, 2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur (“CAT”) whereby, the Original Application preferred by the petitioner-Income-tax Continent Employees’ Union seeking directions to the respondents to make payment of bonus to the casual labourers from the year 2010-2011 onwards along with interest @ 12% pa has been disposed of with the directions in the following terms:- “7. Accordingly, the OA is disposed of with a direction to the applicants to supply the names of the effected individuals to the respondent department. The respondent department thereafter may settle the issue in terms of the order dated 07.04.2016 passed in OA 365/2014. No order as to costs.” 2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submits that there was a specific prayer made on behalf of the petitioner before the CAT regarding the payment of interest on the arrears of bonus, however, the submissions made in this regard have not been dealt with by the CAT and a review application preferred by the petitioner seeking review of the order dated 12th May, 2016 also stands dismissed by the CAT vide order dated 4th July, 2016. 3. Learned counsel submitted that the CAT has issued directions to the petitioners to supply the names of the effected individuals to the respondent-Department and accordingly, the (3 of 4 ) [CW-10798/2016] respondent-Department has been directed to settle the issue with regard to payment of bonus in terms of the order dated 7th April, 2016 passed in Original Application No. 365/2014 whereas, while deciding the Original Application No. 365/2014, the Tribunal has not issued any directions regarding payment of interest and, therefore, the order passed by the CAT to this extent is erroneous. 4. On the other hand, learned counsel appearing for the respondents submitted that on the same day, yet another original application preferred by the petitioner Union regarding revision of pay of members of the petitioner-Union and payment of arrears along with interest were disposed of by the CAT and aggrieved thereby, the petitioners preferred D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 10817/2016 before this Court which stands dismissed by the order dated 4th November, 2016, therefore, no interference in the matter is called for by this Court in exercise of its extra-ordinary jurisdiction. 5. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. 6. It is to be noticed that the petitioner-Union, while claiming the payment of bonus to its members from the year 2011 onwards, did not set out any details regarding claim of the individual members and, therefore, the CAT has disposed of the original application in the terms indicated above. Obviously, in terms of the directions issued by the CAT, the individual member of the petitioner Union has to submit his claim before (4 of 4 ) [CW-10798/2016] the respondent-Department in its turn is required to decide the same in view of the order dated 7th April, 2016 passed in Original Application No. 365/2014. 7. Since, the actual entitlement of the individual members of the petitioner's Union has not been determined by the CAT, it is always open for the members of the petitioner's Union to raise the claim regarding interest as well before the respondents. 8. No case for interference by this Court in exercise of its extra-ordinary jurisdiction is made out. 9. The writ petition is, therefore, dismissed. No order as to costs. (DEEPAK MAHESHWARI),J. (SANGEET LODHA),J. /Mohan/S-78 "