The Principal Chief Commissioner Of CGST And Cx Kolkata Zone, GST Bhawan vs. Banti Kumar And Ors

Facts

The Petitioner, Principal Chief Commissioner of CGST & CX, Kolkata Zone, challenged an interlocutory order passed by the Tribunal on August 13, 2026. This order directed the Respondent Department not to give effect to a transfer order dated August 7, 2026, concerning the Applicants before the Tribunal. The Applicants, originally from Central Excise, Chennai Zone, were transferred to Kolkata-II Central Excise Commissionerate as Inspectors in May 2017, agreeing to give up their seniority and serve anywhere within the Kolkata Zone. Approximately nine years later, they were transferred back to various places in their parent zones. The Tribunal initially stayed their transfer and later directed maintenance of status quo ante, allowing them to join their previous stations until the next hearing. The Department argued that these repatriations were based on a Supreme Court-sustained Circular dated September 20, 2018.

Held

The Court, while acknowledging its general reluctance to interfere with interlocutory orders, balanced the equities between the parties. It noted that the Original Applicants had been relieved from service by the transfer order dated August 7, 2026, but had not yet joined their parent Commissionerates. Given that the final hearing was scheduled before the Tribunal, the Court provided two options to the Petitioner Department: either allow the Applicants to work and extract work from them until the Tribunal decides the Original Applications, or maintain the status quo as existing on the date of the order and continue paying their salaries if work is not to be extracted. The Court directed the Petitioner Department to file its Affidavit-in-Reply/Written Statement before the Tribunal by September 25, 2026, and allowed the Original Applicants to file a Counter/Rejoinder Affidavit by September 29, 2026. The parties were to tender Written Notes of arguments and conclude oral submissions by September 30, 2026. All contentions of the parties were kept open for the Tribunal's consideration. The Petition was disposed of by consent.

Key Issues

1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in passing an interlocutory order staying the transfer of the Applicants, considering they had already been relieved from service and were in the process of repatriation to their parent zones after approximately nine years. Petitioner's Argument: The Petitioner, Principal Chief Commissioner of CGST & CX, Kolkata Zone, contended that the Tribunal erred in interfering with the transfer order, especially when the Applicants had already been relieved and were subject to a Circular dated September 20, 2018, which was upheld by the Supreme Court. The Petitioner sought to assail the Tribunal's interlocutory order dated August 13, 2026. Respondent's Argument: The Respondent Applicants argued for the maintenance of status quo ante, seeking to join their previous stations. They had approached the Tribunal after being transferred back to their parent zones, from which they had been disconnected for nearly nine years, having sacrificed their seniority upon their initial transfer to Kolkata.