A. Satish Kumar vs. The Registrar (Administration)
Held
The Court did not decide the merits of the case regarding the legality of the transfer. Instead, the learned counsel for the petitioner stated that he did not wish to press the present petition. He sought and was granted leave to pursue his remedies before the High Court of Andhra Pradesh concerning C.C.No.2 of 2018. Alternatively, he was granted leave to approach the Supreme Court by filing a transfer petition to seek the transfer of C.C.No.2 of 2018 from the State of Andhra Pradesh to the State of Telangana. Consequently, the present writ petition was disposed of along with any pending applications, without any decision on the substantive issues raised.
Facts
The petitioner, A. Satish Kumar, a Superintendent of Central Tax, GST, filed a writ petition challenging the transfer of C.C.No.2 of 2018 from the Court of III Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad, to the Court of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Visakhapatnam. The petitioner sought a writ of mandamus to declare this transfer as non-est in law and to direct the continuation of proceedings in Hyderabad. The petition was filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. Interlocutory Applications were also filed seeking a stay of proceedings and permission to file additional affidavits. The respondents included the Registrar (Administration) of the High Court, the III Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad, the CBI, the State of Telangana, and the Ministry of Personnel, PG and Pensions.
Key Issues
The primary issue before the Court was whether the transfer of C.C.No.2 of 2018 from the Court of III Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad, to the Court of Special Judge for CBI Cases, Visakhapatnam, was legally valid. The petitioner sought to have this transfer declared void and the proceedings continued in Hyderabad. The Court had to decide on the legality of the transfer action by the respondents. The petitioner's contention was that the transfer was without legal basis. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the respondents regarding the legality of the transfer, but rather focuses on the petitioner's request to pursue alternative remedies.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA (Special Original Jurisdiction) TUESDAY, THE TWENTY THIRD DAY OF FEBRUARY TWO THOUSAND AND TWENTY ONE PRESENT THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HIMA KOHLI AND THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE B. VIJAYSEN REDDY W T PETITI NN 2454 oF 2019 Between: AND 1 A. Satish Kumar, _S/o. Lale Shri-a.Narasimham, aged 50 years, Occ_ Superintendent of Central Tax, GST, O/o. The Comhissioner' (Aobea-tJ_tt Commissioneralel Central Tax and Customs, Room No.B10, ith il"bi,-GSi Bhavan, Opp: LB Stadium, Basheerbagh, Hyderabad-500 004. ...PETITIONER 2 3 The Registrar (Administration), Hon'ble High Court for State of Telangana, Hyderabad.
The Court of lll Additional Special Judge for CBI Cases, Hyderabad.
Represented by Administrative Officer, Gaganavihar, Namirally, Hyderabad. l[g Stqle, Central Bureau of lnvestigation, Represented by lnspector of police CBl, CB, Hyderabad rep. by The Speciat public prosecutbr, iBl, Hon,ble High Court, Hyderabad The State of Telangana, rep. by The Secretary to Government, Legal Affairs, Legislative Affairs and Justice Government of Telangana, Hyderabid.
The Secretary, IVlinistry of Personnel, PG and Pensions, Department of Personnel and Training,
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.