AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Prasanna B. Varale, CJ
Heard Sri. Aravind Kamath, learned ASG-I representing the Accused/Respondents. He invites our attention to the order dated 13.08.2018 of the Central Administrative Tribunal placed on record vide Annexure-C and submits that the first part of the order i.e., the direction to promote the petitioner to the post of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax w.e.f. 30.01.2025 within a period of one month, is complied with. Learned ASGI submits that there is some delay in completing the said exercise, but the same was due to procedural difficulties; the same being unintentional be condoned. We accept the said submission. He further submits that insofar as the payment of emoluments due & payable to the Complainant on account of promotion to the post of Commissioner of Income Tax would be paid to the Complainant on or before 15.01.2024. This statement is accepted as an undertaking of the Respondents to this Court.
Learned ASGI submits that insofar as second part of the direction is concerned namely, conducting of DPC for considering the Complainant’s candidature for further promotional post namely, Chief Commissioner of Income Tax, there was some difficulty; The CAT order was challenged in W.P.No.2238/2019 and the Division Bench dismissed the same on 21.04.2021. Review Petition No.81/2022 also met with no success vide order dated 13.12.2022. Thereafter, the matter was carried to the Apex Court in S.L.P.Nos.14091 & 14092/2023 disposed off on 06.07.2023 and that also met with the same fate. In these circumstances, the second direction remains uncomplied with and that the entire process will be completed if a period of three months is granted. We appreciate the difficulty of the official respondents. However, it is they who had lodged the challenge to the orders of the CAT before the Co-ordinate Bench in writ petition followed by review petition and ultimately, followed by S.L.P. Be that as it may, justice of the case warrants that a period of two months can be granted for accomplishing the compliance of the second direction with pith and substance. The submission of the learned ASG that the exercise would be accomplish in terms of the said direction is taken as a undertaking given to this Court as said.
In the above circumstances and with the above observations, this compliant of contempt is disposed off and notice is discharged. In case, the Accused/Respondents fail to comply with their undertaking given to this Court as above, it is open to the complainant to seek revival of this compliant. Costs made easy.