The Principal Commissioner Of CGST And Cx, Kolkata North CGST And Cx Commissionerate Kolkata North vs. Arindam Roy And Ors
Original PDF →Facts
The respondents, who were applicants before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Kolkata Bench, sought the benefits of the 5th Pay Revision Committee's recommendations from January 1, 1996. They were aggrieved as these benefits were extended to them only from 2004. The CAT allowed their claim, leading the Union of India (petitioner) to challenge the CAT's order dated February 5, 2024, before the High Court. The petitioner's counsel submitted that an identical issue concerning Inspectors in the Central Excise & Customs Department was decided by the Telangana High Court in R. Siva Shankara Sastry & Ors. Vs. the Union of India & Ors. The Supreme Court dismissed the Union of India's Special Leave Petition against the Telangana High Court's order on February 28, 2025.
Held
The Court found that the present writ proceedings had become infructuous. This was based on the submission by the petitioner's counsel that the issue of entitlement to the benefits of the 5th Pay Revision Committee with effect from January 1, 1996, had been settled by the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court had dismissed the Special Leave Petition filed by the Union of India against the Telangana High Court's order in a similar case (R. Siva Shankara Sastry & Ors. Vs. the Union of India & Ors.). The ratio decidendi is that once the Apex Court has affirmed a principle through dismissal of an SLP, subsequent identical matters before High Courts become infructuous. The Court noted that the respondents' counsel also agreed that the issue was decided and that benefits should be extended. No specific operative directions were issued beyond disposing of the writ petition.
Key Issues
1. Whether Inspectors in the Central Excise & Customs Department are entitled to the benefits of the 5th Pay Revision Committee with effect from January 1, 1996? (Question of law) Petitioner's argument: The petitioner conceded that the issue regarding the entitlement to the benefits of the 5th Pay Revision Committee from January 1, 1996, has been settled by the Supreme Court's dismissal of the Special Leave Petition in the case of R. Siva Shankara Sastry & Ors. Vs. the Union of India & Ors., rendering the present proceedings infructuous. Respondents' argument: The respondents' counsel agreed that the issue is decided and submitted that 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 (M/L-28) Ct. No.4 (B.K.N.) W.P.C.T. 80 of 2025 With CAN 1 of 2025
The Principal Commissioner of CGST & CX, Kolkata North CGST & CX Commissionerate Vs. Arindam Roy & Ors.
Mr. Vipul Kundalia, Ms. Aishwarya Rajyashree
...for the Petitioner
Mr. Debasish Ghosh, Mr. Debopriyo Karan
...for the Respondents
In Re: CAN 1 of 2025
An application has been filed for substitution of the legal heirs of respondent no. 36 who has passed away on 30.12.2024. Copy of death certificate has been enclosed with the CAN application. The legal heir to be substituted, namely the wife of respondent no. 36 has been described with details in paragraph 6 of the CAN application.
Let the wife of deceased respondent no. 36 as per description in paragraph 6 of the CAN application be substituted in place of respondent no. 36. 3. Application being CAN 1 of 2025 is thus disposed of.
2 In Re: W.P.C.T. 80 of 2025
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 the benefits of the 5th Pay Revision Committee’s recommendations 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 brought the Union of India before this Court assailing the order dated 05.02.2024 passed by the C.A.T. in O.A. No. 148 of 2024 and M.A. No. 134 of 2024. 2. When the matter was called on today at the very outset the petitioner’s learned counsel has fairly submitted that the identical issue whether Inspectors in the Central Excise & Customs Department would be entitled to benefits of 5th Pay Revision Committee with effect from 01.01.1996 was decided by the Telangana High Court in Writ Petition No. 10490 of 2024 in the case of R. Siva Shankara Sastry & 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 Apex Court. The S.L.P. (Civil) No. 59005 of 2024 has been dismissed on 28.02.2025 by the Apex Court.
3
As per the learned counsel for the petitioner since the issue regarding entitlement of the petitioners to grant of benefits of 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 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 infructuous as the petitioner’s entitlement has already been affirmed by the Apex Court as per the proceedings taken note of above.
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.