The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax A.P., V. Central Administrative Tribunal,

WP/25314/1999

AI Insights

The case involves multiple writ petitions filed by the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, Andhra Pradesh, and the Union of India against orders passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench. These orders were related to the promotion of certain employees, which the Tribunal had directed to be reviewed and acted upon within specified time frames. The petitions sought to quash these orders under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, arguing that the Tribunal's directions were not implemented. However, it was acknowledged during the proceedings that the respondent-applicants in the original applications had already been promoted and retired, leading to the dismissal of the petitions as they had become infructuous.

• Counselvise Citation: [2008] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 719754 (HC-ANDHRA_PRADESH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 31-07-2008
• Assessment Year: misc
• Laws Referred To: Article 226 of the Constitution of India
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: B G R RAVINDER REDDY; G V R S VARA PRASADA RAO
• Assessee Lawyers: S R ASHOK
• Keywords: Central Administrative Tribunal; Contempt petition; Income Tax; Promotion; Writ of Certiorari
• Section: 576/98; 742/98; 615/98

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE, ANDHRA PRADESH AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Jurisdiction) THURSDAY, THE THIRTY FIRST DAY OF JULY TWO THOUSAND AND EIGHT PRESENT THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.Nos.25021, 25310, 25311, 25312, 25313 & 25314 of 1999 W.P.No.25021 of 1999 Between: 1 The Chief Commissioner of Incometax Andhra Pradesh, 8th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. 2 Union of India Rep. by its Secretary Central Board of Direct Taxes North Block, New Delhi. PETITIONERS AND 1 Central Administrative Tribunal Rep. by its Registrar. Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad. 2 M. Venkateswara Rao S/o. Late M. Venkata Ramana O/o Addl. CIT., (Audit) Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction quash the orders dt. 27.09.1999 in C.P.No. 59/99 in O.A.No. 576/98 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, at Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioners : MR.S.R.ASHOK Counsel for Respondent No.2: G.V.R.S.VARA PRASADA RAO W.P.No.25310 of 1999 1 The Chief Commissioner of Incometax, Andhra Pradesh, 8th Floor , Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh , Hyderabad. 2 Union Of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block , New Delhi. PETITIONERS AND 1 Central Administrative Tribunal, Rep. by its Registrar, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad. 2 Sri.Eshwaraiah, S/o.C.China Sangappa, O/o.The Addl.C.I.I.(Audit), Aayakar Bhavan , Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to May be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction to quash the orders Dt: 27-09-99 in C.P.No.69/99 in O.A.742/98 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.R.ASHOK Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.B.G.RAVINDER REDDY W.P.No.25311 of 1999 Between: 1 The Chief Commissioner of Incomtax, A.P. , 8th Floor , Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh , Hyderabad. 2 Union Of india, Rep. by its Secretary, Central Board Of Direct Taxes, North Block , New Delhi. PETITIONERS AND 1 Central Administrative Tribunal, Rep. by its Registrar, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad. 2 Sri.C.Eshwaraiah, S/o.C.Chinna Sangappa, O/o.The Addl.C.I.T.(Audit), Ayakar Bhavan , Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to May be pleased to issue a writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction to quash the order Dt: 24-12-1998 in O.A.No.742/98 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabd Bench at Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.R.ASHOK Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.B.G.RAVINDER REDDY W.P.No. 25312 of 1999 Between: 1 The Chief Commissioner of Incometax, Andhra Pradesh, 8th Floor , Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh , Hyderabad. 2 Union Of India, Rep. by its Secretary, Central Board Of Direct Taxes, North Block , New Delhi. PETITIONERS AND 1 Central Administrative Tribunal, Rep. by its Registrar, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad. 2 M.Venkateswara Rao, S/o.Late M.Venkata Ramana, O/o.Addl.C.I.T., (Audit), Aayakar Bhavan , Basheerbagh, Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to May be pleased to issue Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction quash the orders Dt: 22-12-1998 in O.A.No.576/98 passed by the central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad Bench , at Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.R.ASHOK Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.G.V.R.S.VARA PRASAD W.P.No. 25313 of 1999 Between: 1 The Chief Commissioner of Incometax , Andhra Pradesh, 8th Floor , Aayakar Bhavan Basheerbagh , Hyderabad. 2 Union Of India, Rep by its Secretary, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block , New Delhi. PETITIONERS AND 1 Central Administrative Tribunal, Rep by its Registrar, Hyderabad Bench , Hyderabad. 2 Smt. D.Jagadamba, W/o.D.Narsimha Reddy, I.T.Office , Circle-1 Basheerbagh , Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to May be pleased to issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction to quash the orders Dt: 27-09-1999 in C.P.No.61/99 in O.A.No.615/98 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.R.ASHOK Counsel for the Respondent No.: MR.B.G.RAVINDER REDDY W.P.No. 25314 of 1999 Between: 1 The Chief Commissioner of Income Tax A.P., 8th Floor , Aayakar Bhavan, Basheerbagh , Hyderabad. 2 Union of India, Rep by its Secretary, Central Board of Direct Taxes, North Block , New Delhi. PETITIONERS AND 1 Central Administrative Tribunal, Rep by its Registrar, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad. 2 Smt.D.Jagadamba, W/o.D.Narsimha Reddy, I.T.Office , Circle-1, Aayakar Bhavan, Basheer Bagh , Hyderabad. .....RESPONDENTS Petition under Article 226 of the constitution of India praying that in the circumstances stated in the Affidavit filed herein the High Court will be pleased to to issue Writ of Certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order or direction to quash the order dt: 15-12-1998 in O.A.No.615/98 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal , Hyderabad Bench , at Hyderabad. Counsel for the Petitioner:MR.S.R.ASHOK Counsel for the Respondent No.2: The Court made the following : THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.Nos.25021, 25310, 25311, 25312, 25313 & 25314 of 1999 COMMON ORDER: (Per Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) W.P.No.25021 of 1999 This writ petition is filed seeking to quash the orders made in Contempt Petition No.59 of 1999 in O.A.No.576 of 1998 dated 27.9.199 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyderabad. The unofficial respondent is the applicant in the O.A. He filed the above contempt case complaining non-implementation of the judgment passed in O.A.No.576 of 1998 dated 22.12.1998. The operative portion of the said judgment reads as under: “Considering the facts revealed in this case, it would be necessary to direct the respondents to convene a Review DPC expeditiously in order to consider the case of the applicant as per rules. If the applicant is found fit for promotion by the DPC, necessary consequential action should be taken within one month, thereafter. All action in this regard may be completed in 90 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this order”. The Tribunal, after considering the rival contentions, closed the Contempt Petition with the following direction: “The DPC should review the cases of all the applicants in all the OAs and pass a suitable order regarding their fitness or otherwise for promotion to the higher grade on the basis of their performance reports which was considered in the case of similarly placed candidates in that selection without considering the service eligibility condition. Time for compliance is two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. With the above direction, the CP is closed”. Now, it is represented by the learned Senior Counsel Mr.S.R.Ashok appearing for petitioners that the respondent- applicant had already been promoted and retired from service. This fact is not disputed by the learned counsel appearing for respondent-applicant. In the circumstances, the cause in the writ petition does not survive for further adjudication and it has become infructuous. W.P.Nos.25310, 25311, 25312, 25313 & 25314 of 1999 In view of the above, all the writ petitions are dismissed. However, the issues that remain to be decided are left open for consideration and adjudication. No order as to costs. ____________________ GHULAM MOHAMMED, J _____________ C.V.RAMULU, J Date: 31.7.2008 DA THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE GHULAM MOHAMMED and THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.RAMULU W.P.Nos.25021, 25310, 25311, 25312, 25313 & 25314 of 1999 (Order of the Bench delivered by Hon’ble Sri Justice Ghulam Mohammed) 31.7.2008 "