Mukesh Kumar Mann S/O Late Shri Ratan Lal Mann vs. Union Of INDIA

Held

The Court held that the Tribunal's order dated September 6, 2023, rejecting the petitioner's interim relief application, was passed without considering the interim orders dated September 5, 2023, and September 8, 2023, passed by the Jodhpur Bench in the cases of Pritam Sharma and Narendra Kumar Sharma, respectively. These orders directed the maintenance of status-quo ante even after the reversion of those individuals. The Court noted that the respondents had not challenged these Jodhpur Bench orders and had complied with them. The Court found that the petitioner had not placed the Pritam Sharma order before the Jaipur Bench on September 6, 2023, and the interim protection granted on September 1, 2023, in Manoj Kumar Meena's case was based on the petitioner not having been reverted at that time. Therefore, the Court granted the petitioner liberty to apply for modification of the September 6, 2023 order, bringing the Jodhpur Bench's interim orders to the Tribunal's notice. The Tribunal was directed to pass an appropriate order at the earliest. The writ petition was disposed of with this liberty.

Facts

The petitioner, Mukesh Kumar Mann, a Superintendent in the Central Goods and Service Tax and Central Excise, Jaipur, challenged an order dated September 6, 2023, by which his application for interim relief was rejected by the Tribunal. The rejection was based on the ground that the petitioner had already been reverted. The petitioner argued that the Jaipur and Jodhpur Benches of the Tribunal were passing conflicting orders on the same issue of seniority, affecting eleven officers. He contended that the Jodhpur Bench had granted status-quo ante orders even after reversion in cases like Pritam Sharma (September 5, 2023) and Narendra Kumar Sharma (September 8, 2023), but similar protection was denied to him. The respondents argued that the petitioner had not brought the Pritam Sharma order to the Tribunal's notice, relying only on an earlier interim order dated September 1, 2023, in Manoj Kumar Meena & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Tribunal erred in rejecting the petitioner's application for interim relief solely on the ground of his prior reversion, when similar interim orders (status-quo ante) had been granted by another bench of the same Tribunal to similarly situated individuals after their reversion? Petitioner's Contention: The petitioner argued that the Tribunal's Jaipur Bench was inconsistent with the Jodhpur Bench, which had granted status-quo ante orders even after reversion in the cases of Pritam Sharma and Narendra Kumar Sharma. He asserted that he was similarly situated and deserved similar protection, highlighting the conflicting orders arising from the same seniority issue affecting multiple officers. Revenue's Contention: The respondents contended that the petitioner had not brought the order dated September 5, 2023, in Pritam Sharma's case to the Tribunal's notice. They argued that the petitioner had sought parity based on an interim order dated September 1, 2023, passed in Manoj Kumar Meena & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors., and therefore, the impugned order rejecting interim relief was not illegal.