Rajesh Kumar V. Union Of India, Ministry Of Finance and The Under Secretary, Government Of India, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue, Central Board Of Direct Tax and The Chairman, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue, Central Board Of Direct Tax and Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rajasthan, Jaipur

CW/7364/2020

AI Insights

Rajesh Kumar, the petitioner, challenged the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur, which declined to grant him interim relief against his reversion from the post of Joint Commissioner of Income Tax to his substantive post as Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. This reversion was based on an order dated 27.05.2020, which was contested by Kumar. The petitioner argued that similar cases had been granted interim relief and cited an Office Memorandum (OM) that suggested employees officiating in a higher post on an adhoc basis for over a year should not be reverted if disciplinary proceedings were initiated. The respondents defended the reversion based on the conditions of the appointment order and relevant instructions. The High Court, without delving into the merits, directed the Tribunal to expedite the case.

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 819652 (HC-RAJASTHAN)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 07-12-2020
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: OM No.11012/9/89 dated 24.12.1986, OM No.28036/8/87 dated 30.03.1988
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: ANAND SHARMA
• Assessee Lawyers: KARAN KHEHAR; VIJAY SHARMA
• Keywords: Central Administrative Tribunal; Civil Writ Petition; Income Tax; Interim relief; Reversion; Adhoc Appointment

Judgement Text

"HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 7364/2020 Rajesh Kumar S/o Thandu Ram, Aged About 42 Years, Resident Of Flat No. 702, Star Hitawala Complex, Pulia Bridge, Udaipur (Rajasthan) Permanent Resident Of Near Post Office Tosham, District Bhiwani (Haryana) Presently Posted As Joint Commissioner, Income Tax, (Senior Department Representative, ITAT) Jodhpur. ----Petitioner Versus 1. Union Of India, Ministry Of Finance Through Its Secretary Department Of Revenue, Central Board Of Direct Tax, North Block, New Delhi-110001. 2. The Under Secretary, Government Of India, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue, Central Board Of Direct Tax, North Block, New Delhi-110001. 3. The Chairman, Ministry Of Finance, Department Of Revenue, Central Board Of Direct Tax, North Block, New Delhi-110001. 4. Principal Chief Commissioner Of Income Tax, Rajasthan, Jaipur, Income Tax Department, Statue Circle, Jaipur (Rajasthan) ----Respondents For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Karan Singh Khehar, Advocate with Mr. Vijay Dutt Sharma, Advocate through video conferencing For Respondent(s) : Mr. Anand Sharma, Advocate through video conferencing HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRAKASH GUPTA Judgment / Order 07/12/2020 Petitioner has filed the petition challenging the order dated 6.7.2020 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jaipur (2 of 3) [CW-7364/2020] Bench Jaipur, whereby, prayer for grant of interim relief to the petitioner, was declined. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner was appointed as Joint Commissioner Income Tax vide order dated 31.12.2018 along with others on adhoc basis. Vide order dated 27.05.2020 (Annexure-1) the Competent Authority decided not to extend the term of adhoc appointment of the petitioner to the post of Joint Commissioner Income Tax and it was decided to revert the petitioner to his substantive post, i.e., Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax. In pursuance to the order Annexure-1 order of reversion dated 16.06.2020 (Annexure-2) was passed. Petitioner challenged his reversion by filing an Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal. Vide impugned order dated 6.7.2020, Tribunal declined to grant interim relief to the petitioner. Learned counsel has further submitted that in similar circumstances, the other Tribunals had been granted interim relief to the employees. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner has not been reverted so far. Learned counsel has placed reliance on OM No.11012/9/89 dated 24.12.1986 issued by the Ministry of Personnel and Training, wherein, it was clarified that, in case, where disciplinary proceedings are initiated against an employee officiating on a higher post on adhoc basis then he need not be reverted, if he has held the appointment for more than one year. Learned counsel for the respondents, on the other hand, has opposed the petition and has submitted that reversion order had been passed in terms of the conditions mentioned in the appointment order, keeping in view the instructions contained in OM No.28036/8/87 dated 30.03.1988. Original Application filed by (3 of 3) [CW-7364/2020] similarly situated employee had been dismissed by the Central Administrative Tribunal Bench, Chandigarh. After going through the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, we are of opinion that ends of justice would be met, in case, the Tribunal is directed to dispose of the Original Application expeditiously. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the Tribunal to dispose of the Original Application filed by the petitioner expeditiously in accordance with law preferably within one month from today. In the meantime, in case, petitioner has not been already reverted, his reversion shall remain stayed, till the disposal of the Original Application by the Central Administrative Tribunal. (PRAKASH GUPTA),J (SABINA),J Mohita /32 "