UNION OF INDIA Vs. AJITKUMAR SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Mrs.Mauna M. Bhatt appearing on behalf of the petitioner and the Party-in-person Mr.Ajitkumar Singh appearing as the respondent. --------------------------------------------------------- Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the Judgment?

(2.) Present petition is directed by the Union of India challenging the order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench, Ahmedabad in O.A. No.459 / 2002 dated 30th September, 2003 whereby, the tribunal has quashed the orders of competent authority and further directed the petitioner to promote the respondent from 1st December, 1995 from the date his juniors were promoted and further directed to complete the exercise within six weeks from the date of receipt of the order. Thereafter, the petitioner had moved one Misc. Application No.700 / 2003 for extension of time which was also rejected by the Tribunal on 1st December, 2003.

(3.) The brief facts giving rise to the present petition are as under : The respondent was recruited on the basis of combined Civil Service Examination 1990 on 1st January, 1992. After undergoing the training period, the respondent was posted as an Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax at Allahabad on 13th April, 1993. Thereafter, he was transferred as Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Varanasi on 21st July, 1993. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Varanasi range and Commissioner of Income Tax are the reporting and reviewing authorities respectively. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax of Varanasi Range and Commissioner of Income Tax recorded certain adverse remarks in the Annual Confidential Report of the respondent and those remarks were communicated to the respondent on 14th July, 1995. Against which, a representation was made by the respondent to the Chief Commissioner of Income Tax on account of malafides on the part of the Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Varanasi range and the Commissioner of Income Tax as the respondent had refused to accommodate them by passing certain favourable orders in certain specific cases. The said representation remained pending for more than two years and thereafter, he made request on 4th November, 1997 to expedite the decision on the representation. By letter dated 13th November, 1997 it was informed to the respondent by the authority that his representation has been rejected and authority had declined to interfere with the adverse remarks recorded by the concerned authority. Therefore, the respondent had filed application being O.A. No.755 / 1997 before the Central Administrative Tribunal challenging the order of adverse remarks. The Central Administrative Tribunal vide order dated 2nd December, 1998 held that the order could not be sustained and the same was quashed and it was directed to the petitioner to re-examine the matter again with application of mind and come to a proper finding in respect of the adverse remarks and to communicate the decision to the respondent by a speaking order. Thereafter, the respondent had received a message from the office of the authority on 10th March, 1999 requesting the respondent to say in support of his representation. Thereafter, the competent authority has passed the order on 12th March, 1999 holding that out of 14 remarks, 9 were expunged, three were retained and one was directed not to be treated as adverse remarks. The said order was challenged by the respondent before the Central Administrative Tribunal by filing O.A. No.369 / 1999 but the Tribunal has dismissed O.A. vide order dated 2nd February, 2000 sustaining the order of the competent authority dated 12th March, 1999.