The Principal Commissioner Of CGST And Cx Kolkata North CGST And Cx Commissionerate vs. Gautam Salui And Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The respondents, who were applicants before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Kolkata Bench, sought benefits recommended by the 5th Pay Revision Committee from January 1, 1996. They were aggrieved as these benefits were extended to them only from 2004. The CAT allowed their claim, and the Union of India (petitioner) assailed this order before the High Court. The impugned CAT order was dated February 29, 2024, in M.A. 251 of 2024 in connection with O.A. 267 of 2024. The petitioner's counsel conceded that the issue of entitlement to the 5th Pay Revision Committee benefits from January 1, 1996, for Inspectors in the Central Excise and Customs Department had been decided by the Telangana High Court.
Held
The Court noted the submission of the petitioner's counsel that the issue regarding the entitlement of Inspectors in the Central Excise and Customs Department to the benefits of the 5th Pay Revision Committee from January 1, 1996, has been decided by the Telangana High Court. Crucially, the Union of India's Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 59005 of 2024, assailing the Telangana High Court's order, was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on February 28, 2025. Consequently, the petitioner's counsel argued that the matter was settled and nothing further needed consideration. The respondents' counsel concurred. The Court found that the writ proceedings had become infructuous as the petitioner's entitlement had already been affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court. The writ petition was disposed of in light of these developments.
Key Issues
1. Whether Inspectors in the Central Excise and Customs Department are entitled to the benefits of the 5th Pay Revision Committee with effect from January 1, 1996. Petitioner's argument: The petitioner's counsel submitted that the issue has been settled by the Telangana High Court in the case of R. Siva Shankara Sastry and Ors. –Vs.- The Union of India & Ors., and the Union of India's Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 59005 of 2024 against that order was dismissed by the Hon'ble Apex Court on February 28, 2025. Therefore, nothing remains to be considered in the present proceedings. Respondents' argument: The learned counsel for the private respondents agreed that since the issue is decided, the authorities are obliged to extend the benefits and their consequences to the private respondents.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
2025 (D/L-17) Ct. No.4 (B.K.N.) W.P.C.T. 130 of 2025
The Principal Commissioner of CGST & CX, Kolkata North CGST & CX Commissionerate Vs. Gautam Salui & Ors.
Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Ms. Aishwarya Rajyashree
...for the Petitioner
Mr. Debasish Ghosh, Mr. Debopriyo Karan
...for the Respondents
The respondents herein who were applicants before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Kolkata Bench (hereinafter referred to as “the C.A.T.”) had approached the C.A.T. seeking benefits of the 5th Pay Revision Committee’s recommendation with effect from 01.01.1996. The applicants were aggrieved since the benefits had been extended to them from the year 2004. The C.A.T. has allowed their claim which has been assailed by the Union of India before this Court. The impugned order is dated 29.02.2024 passed in M.A. 251 of 2024 in connection with O.A. 267 of 2024. 2. When the matter was called on today at the very outset the petitioner’s learned counsel has fairly submitted that the same issue as regards whether
2 Inspectors in the Central Excise and Customs Department would be entitled to benefits of the 5th Pay Revision Committee with effect from 01.01.1996 has been decided by the Telangana High Court in Writ Petition No. 10490 of 2024 in the case of R. Siva Shankara Sastry and Ors. –Vs.- The Union of India & Ors.. The order of the Telangana High Court dated 09.08.2024 passed in the writ proceeding was assailed by the Union of India before the Hon’ble Apex Court. The S.L.P (Civil) No. 59005 of 2024 has been dismissed on 28.02.2025 by the Hon’ble Apex Court.
As per the learned counsel for the petitioner since the issue regarding entitlement of the petitioners to grant of benefits of the 5th Pay Revision Committee with effect from 01.01.1996 stands settled in the above noted proceedings, nothing remains to be considered in the present proceedings.
The learned counsel for the private respondents is also present. He also submits that since the issue is now decided, the authorities are obliged to extend the benefits and consequences thereof to the private respondents.
In view of the submissions and the facts taken note of above, we find that the present writ proceedings has become infrauctuous as the petitioners’ entitlement has already been affirmed by the Hon’ble Apex Court as per the proceedings taken note of above.
3
The writ petition is accordingly disposed of.
(Madhuresh Prasad, J.)
(Supratim Bhattacharya, J.)
Reproduced from the public record of the Calcutta High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.