KUMARAN.T.D V. UNION OF INDIA

OP (CAT)/527/2013

AI Insights

The case revolves around the petitioner's grievance against the Central Administrative Tribunal's decision, which dismissed his claim for promotion from Income Tax Inspector-II to Income Tax Officer. The promotion was contested on the grounds that the petitioner, although eligible under the Scheduled Caste reservation, argued that another candidate who qualified as a general candidate could have been placed in the general category, thereby allowing the petitioner to be promoted under the SC category. The court dismissed the petition, emphasizing the importance of not disrupting the promotion of other candidates and adhering to the established criteria for promotions.

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 739133 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2019
• Assessment Year: misc
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: P VIJAYAKUMAR; K R RAJKUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: T SETHUMADHAVAN; PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH; K MOHAN KUMAR; VANDANA MENON
• Keywords: Income Tax Officer; Promotion; Scheduled Caste; Income Tax Inspector-II; Departmental test

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 31ST DAY OF MAY 2019 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1941 OP (CAT).No. 527 of 2013 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 19.03.2012 IN OA 217/2011 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH PETITIONER/APPLICANT: KUMARAN.T.D S/O. LATE DEVAN, INSPECTOR OF INCOME TAX, OFFICE OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THRISSUR, RESIDING AT THERMADATHIL HOUSE, M.G.ROAD, P.O.PERAMANGALAM, THRISSUR-680 545. BY ADVS. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN (SR.) SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR SMT.VANDANA MENON RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 UNION OF INDIA REP.BY SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI-110 001. 2 THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, C.R.BUILDING, I.S.PRESS ROAD, KOCHI-682 018. BY ADVS. SHRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASG OF INDIA SRI.K.R.RAJKUMAR, CGC OTHER PRESENT: THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 31.05.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.(CAT) No.527/2013 2 JUDGMENT Ashok Menon, J. The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench in O.A.No.217/2011 dated 19.03.2012 dismissing his petition claiming promotion from the post of Income Tax Inspector-II to the post of Income Tax Officer. Annexure A1 seniority list of the Income Tax Inspector puts him in the fourth place. The third post for promotion is reserved for Scheduled Caste category. Admittedly, the petitioner did not secure the marks required for general candidates in the departmental test for the Income Tax Officers. He was however eligible for promotion under the reserved category of SC. The one vacancy reserved for SC category went to Smitha Rajeendranath, an SC candidate. 2. The petitioner contends that Smitha Rajeendranath would have qualified for promotion as general candidate, having secured more marks in the departmental test. And hence, had she been pushed to the general category for promotion, the petitioner O.P.(CAT) No.527/2013 3 could have been accommodated in the one vacancy reserved for SC category. 3. Accommodating the petitioner in the category reserved for SC would amount to depriving his senior, Smitha Rajeendranath of her promotion to the third slot reserved for that category. She is not a made party to the proceedings and hence it would be unfair for us to consider such a prayer made by the petitioner in her absence. That apart, we do not find any error in the impugned order of the Tribunal. The fact that the petitioner has to wait longer for another SC vacancy to arise is not a justification for accommodating him in the third slot reserved for SC, depriving Smitha Rajeendranath of her position, that too, in her absence. The Original Petition is therefore dismissed. No costs. Sd/- V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE Sd/- ASHOK MENON dkr JUDGE O.P.(CAT) No.527/2013 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF O.A.217/2011 ALONG WITH ANNEXURES. EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY RESPONDENTS IN O.A.217/2011 (WITH ANNEXURES) EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE REJOINDER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO EXT.P2 REPLY STATEMENT IN O.A.217/2011 (WITH ANNEXURE) EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE ADDITIONAL REPLY STATEMENT FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS TO THE REJOINDER AFFIDAVIT IN O.A.217/2011 DATED 06.09.2011. EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 19.03.2012 IN O.A.217/2011 ON THE FILE OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM. "