K.A.SANDOSH KUMAR V. UNION OF INDIA

OP (CAT)/190/2019

AI Insights

The case involves a group of income-tax officers who challenged a reduction in their pay and allowances through an Original Application (OA) at the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam. The Tribunal initially refused to grant interim relief to the petitioners, which led them to file this petition. The main concern of the petitioners was the potential recovery of excess payments if the OA was eventually dismissed. The High Court of Kerala, after hearing both parties, decided not to grant the interim relief for continuance of the existing pay but provided a safeguard against recovery of any excess payments until the matter is conclusively resolved.

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 722248 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 02-08-2019
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: P VIJAYAKUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: T C GOVINDA SWAMY; B NAMADEVA PRABHU; KALA GOPI; R S SARAT
• Keywords: Central Administrative Tribunal; Income Tax; Interim relief; Reduction of Pay

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY, THE 02ND DAY OF AUGUST 2019 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1941 OP (CAT).No.190 of 2019 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN OA 180384/2019 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH DATED 04-07-2019 PETITIONERS/APPLICANTS: 1 K.A.SANDOSH KUMAR, AGED 54 YEARS S/O AMBUJAKSHAN NAIR (LATE), INCOME-TAX OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX/ PALAKKAD RANGE/PALAKKAD, PERMANENT ADDRESS : PADICKAL PUTHEN VEEDU, KAVUMPURAM, AIMURY P.O., PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-683 544. 2 P. LEELA, AGED 57 YEARS W/O UNNIKRISHNAN, INCOME-TAX OFFICER (EXEMPTION), OFFICE OF THE JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, A.N. PURAM, ALAPPUZHA, PERMANENT ADDRESS: NI-49/172-C, AISWARYA, PADAM ROAD, ELAMAKKARA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682 026. 3 K.P.SOMASEKHARAN NAIR, AGED 58 YEARS S/O P.N.PARAMESWARAN PILLAI, INCOME TAX- OFFICER, WARD NO.V, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX/OFFICE OF THE ADDITIONAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, KOTTAYAM RANGE, PUBLIC LIBRARY BUILDING, SASTRI ROAD, KOTTAYAM, PERMANENT ADDRESS: PRASANTHI, BMRA-105-C, B.T. RANADHIVE ROAD, EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 682 024. OP(CAT)190/2019 -2- 4 B.SURESH KUMAR, AGED 54 YEARS S/O BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, INCOME-TAX INSPECTOR, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, KOWDIYAR, TRIVANDRUM, RESIDING AT TC NO 42/447(1) PULIYARA, M.K.ROAD, CHADIYAR, POOJAPPURA P.O.TRIVANDRUM-695 012. BY ADVS. SRI.T.C.GOVINDA SWAMY SRI.B.NAMADEVA PRABHU SMT.KALA T.GOPI SRI.R.S.SARAT RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 UNION OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI-110001. 2 THE CHAIRMAN, CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NEW DELHI- 110001. 3 THE DIRECTOR OF INCOME-TAX, HUMAN RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT), CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DIRECTORATE OF INCOME-TAX, ICADR BUILDING , PLOT NO 6, VASANT KUNJ INSTITUTIONAL AREA PHASE-11, NEW DELHI-110 070 4 THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME -TAX, KERALA C.R BUILDING, IS PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018. BY ADV. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.08.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: OP(CAT)190/2019 -3- J U D G M E N T [OP(CAT) No.190 of 2019] Chitambaresh, J Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the learned Central Government Counsel. 2. Reduction of pay and allowance is impugned in OA No.180/00384/2019. The Central Administrative Tribunal has by Ext.P1 order refused to grant interim relief. The interim relief sought was continuance of the pay in existence before reduction. 3. We do not think that the petitioners are entitled to any such order as prayed for. There would be an excess payment if eventually the Original Application is dismissed by the Tribunal. The petitioners have an apprehension that Ext.P1 order would be followed by a direction to effect OP(CAT)190/2019 -4- recovery. 4. Interest of justice would be met by holding up any action for recovery of the amount paid in excess. Such an order would be in vogue till the Original Application is finally disposed of. The Central Administrative Tribunal is directed to expedite the hearing of the Original Application. The Original Petition is disposed of. Sd/- V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE Sd/- ASHOK MENON JUDGE jg OP(CAT)190/2019 -5- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 4TH JULY 2019 IN OA NO 180/00384/2019 RENDERED BY THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF OA NO 180/00384/2019 DATED 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2019 ALONG WITH ITS ANNEXURES FILED BEFORE THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF PRELIMINARY STATEMENT DATED 18TH JUNE 2019 FILED BY THE OFFICIAL RESPONDENT IN OA NO 180/00384/2019 BEFORE THE LEARNED TRIBUNAL "