S. K. Nausad Rahaman vs Union of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2022 Supreme(SC) 214

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, VIKRAM NATH
S. K. Nausad Rahaman – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Advocates appeared:
For Appellant(s) Mr. Sibo Sankar Mishra, AOR Mr. Narender Hooda, Sr. Adv. Mr. Yelamanchili Shiva Santosh Kumar, Adv. Mr. Tarun Gupta, AOR Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashish Pandey, Adv. Mr. Rishi Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv. Mr. Prateek Rai, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Akanshya Rai, Adv. Ms. Saksha Jha, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Adv. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Mr. K.M. Nataraj, ASG Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, Adv. Mr. Vinayak Sharma, Adv. Mr. Sharath Nambiar, Adv. Ms. Vatsal Joshi, Adv. Ms. Indira Bhakar, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar Maroria, AOR Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR Mr. Yashraj Singh Deora, AOR Mr. Shyam Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Vibha Datta Makhija, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vikas Singh, Sr. Adv. Mr. Ashish Pandey, Adv. Mr. Rishi Kapoor, Adv. Mr. Kapish Seth, Adv. Mr. Prateek Rai, Adv. Mr. Ashutosh Bhardwaj, Adv. Mr. Akanshya Rai, Adv. Ms. Saksha Jha, Adv. Mr. Sandeep Sharma, Adv. Mr. Vishwa Pal Singh, AOR Mr. Ronak Karanpuria, AOR

JUDGMENT :

DHANANJAYA Y. CHANDRACHUD, J.

(A)	Facts	4
(B)	Relevant circulars and notifications	10
(B-1)	Executive Instructions issued by DoPT	10
(B-2)	Circulars issued by Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance	14
(C)	Submissions	19
(D)	Analysis	26

(A) Facts

1. A Division Bench of the High Court of Kerala dealt with a batch of petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution challenging the orders of the Central Administrative Tribunal on the issue of the withdrawal of Inter-Commissionerate Transfers¹ [“ICT”]. The High Court has come to the conclusion that the Central Excise and Customs Commissionerates Inspector (Central Excise, Preventive Officer and Examiner) Group ‘B’ Posts Recruitment Rules 2016² [“Recruitment Rules 2016” or “RR 2016”] do not contain any provision for ICTs and on the contrary, stipulate that each Cadre Controlling Authority³ [“CCA”] will have its own separate cadre, unless otherwise directed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. The High Court held that ICTs would violate the unique identity of e

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2022 Supreme(SC) 214

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, VIKRAM NATHS. K. Nausad Rahaman – AppellantVersusUnion of India – Respondent

Cases Referred (24)

D. Y. CHANDRACHUD, VIKRAM NATH
S. K. Nausad Rahaman – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent