Union Of INDIA, Ministry Of Finance vs. M.J. Benjamin Walter
Facts
The petitioners, Union of India and others, are aggrieved by an order dated 04.10.2021 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Hyderabad Bench, in O.A. No. 613 of 2021. The respondent, M.J. Benjamin Walter, a retired Assistant Commissioner, had approached the Tribunal seeking promotion to the post of Deputy Commissioner with effect from 01.10.2006. The petitioners had promoted a junior of the respondent to this post vide proceedings dated 19.11.2010, with effect from 01.10.2006. The respondent filed an application to condone the delay in filing the OA, which was allowed by the Tribunal on 09.09.2021, and subsequently, the OA was numbered. The Tribunal, by its order dated 04.10.2021, allowed the OA, directing the petitioners to promote the respondent as Deputy Commissioner with effect from 01.10.2006.
Held
The Court held that the CAT was justified in allowing the OA and directing the promotion of the respondent as Deputy Commissioner with effect from 01.10.2006. The reasoning was that the petitioners themselves had effected promotion to the respondent's junior with effect from 01.10.2006, indicating that the respondent was indeed in service on that date. Therefore, the petitioners could not have ignored the respondent's case for promotion. However, the Court found that the CAT erred in extending the benefit to all retired employees in 'rem' without appreciating whether they were entitled to such a benefit. The Court reasoned that the Tribunal could not have made such a broad decision. Accordingly, the Court partly allowed the writ petition, confirming the CAT's order regarding the respondent's promotion but setting aside the portion extending the benefit to all retired employees.
Key Issues
1. Whether the CAT was justified in allowing the OA and directing the promotion of the respondent as Deputy Commissioner with effect from 01.10.2006, considering he was in service as of that date? 2. Whether the CAT erred in extending the benefit of promotion to all retired employees in 'rem' without appreciating their entitlement? The petitioners argued that the CAT erred in allowing the OA without appreciating that the respondent was no longer in service. They contended that the Tribunal's direction to promote the respondent, and by extension, all retired employees, was inappropriate without considering their entitlement. The petitioners sought to set aside the CAT's order. The respondent's arguments are not recorded in the judgment.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
[ 3313 ] HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD (Special Original Juri iction) MONDAY, THE NINTH DAY OF JANUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY THREE PRESENT THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE ABHINAND KUMAR SHAVILI AND THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE PULLA KARTHIK WRIT PETITION NO: 25657 OF 2022 Between:
Union of lndia, Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue, North Block, New Delhi, Represented by its Secretary.
Central Board of Customs and Central Excise, North Block, New Delhi, Rep. by its Chairman.
The Chief Commissioner, Customs and Central Excise Dept, GST Bhavan, Basheer Bagh, Hyderabad Zone, Hyderabad. ...PETITIONERS AND M.J. Benjamin Walter, Sio Late M.B.John, Aged 59 years, Occ.Retd, R/o 400 Wedgewood Circle, Lake in the Hills, lllinors 60156, USA. ...RESPONDENT Petition Under Article 226 of the Constrtution of lndia praying that in the circumstances stated in the affrdavit filed therewith, the High Court may be pleased too issue Writ, order or drrection, especially one in the nature of Writ of Certiorari, calling for the records relatrng to order dated 411Ol2O21 in O.A.No.613 of 2021 on the file of the Honourable Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, Hyd
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Telangana High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.