High Court Of Delhi
SUNDER GROVER - Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA - Respondent
Decided On : 09/19/1983
CUSTOMS, EXCISE AND GOLD (CONTROL) APPELLATE TRIBUNAL - APPOINTMENT OF VICE PRESIDENT - TERMS AND CONDITIONS - REVERSION TO PREVIOUS POST - VALIDITY - PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE - ARBITRARINESS - STIGMA.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, a Judicial Member of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, was appointed as a Member and Vice President of the Customs Tribunal on certain terms and conditions, including a provision for reversion to his previous post by giving one month's notice. After serving for some time, the petitioner received an order of reversion to his previous post. He challenged the order on various grounds, including violation of principles of natural justice, arbitrariness, and casting of stigma.
Finding of the Court:
The Court held that the petitioner was a temporary employee and was governed by the terms and conditions of his appointment letter. The order of reversion was passed in accordance with the terms of the appointment letter and was not punitive or arbitrary. The Court also held that the order did not cast any stigma on the petitioner and that no opportunity of hearing was required to be given before passing the order.
Issues: 1. Whether the petitioner was confirmed as Vice President of the Customs Tribunal. 2. Whether the impugned order visited the petitioner with civil consequences and is he entitled to an opportunity of hearing. 3. Whether the imputed order has visited the petitioner with civil consequences and is he entitled to an opportunity of hearing. 4. Whether the order is arbitrary.
Ratio Decidendi: 1. The Court held that the petitioner was a temporary employee and was governed by the terms and conditions of his appointment letter. The order of reversion was passed in accordance with the terms of the appointment letter and was not punitive or arbitrary. 2. The Court held that the order did not cast any stigma on the petitioner and that no opportunity of hearing was required to be given before passing the order.
Final Decision: The Court dismissed the petition, holding that the order of reversion was valid and did not suffer from any infirmity.
( 1 ) THIS petition challenges the impugned order passed by the President of India on July 16, 1983 by which he gave one months notice to the petitioner and further ordered that on the expiry of the period of one month from the date on which this notice is served on him he shall stand reverted to the post of Judicial Member, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. As reference to this order has to find place anumber of time in the judgment it will be apt to reproduce the impugned order which is as follows : in accordance with the provisions. of paragraph 1 (6) of this Ministry s memorandum F. No. A-1202619j 82-Ad. lktrib) dated the 14th September, 1982, concerning the terms and conditions of appointment of Sbri S. Grover as Vice-President in the Customs Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal the President is pleased hereby to give one month s notice to Shri Grover and to order that on the expiry of the period of one month from the date on which this notice is served oil him, he shall stand reverted io the post of Judicial Member, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal.
( 2 ) THE petitioner is a B. A. ,ll. B. and was practising Advocate. The petitioner joined as a Judicial Member of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal on 3fd August, 1973. By Section 50 of the Finance Act 2 of 1980 read with fifth Schedule, an Appellate Trbunal was constituted called the Customs, Excise and Gold (Control) Appellate Tribunal to be called the Customs Tribun al consisting of as many Judicial and technical members as the Central Government may think fit to appoint. Section 129 (4) of the Finance Act further emmpowered the Central Government to appoint one or more members of the Customs Tribunal to be Vice President or as the case may be Vice Presidents thereof.
( 3 ) IN order to make selection of the personnel of the Customs Tribunal, the Government of India on 21st November, 1981 constituted a Selection Committee which was chaired by one of the sitting judges of the Supreme Court. In due course the petitioner was called for interview and on 14th September, 1982 the President offered to the petitioner an. appointment as a Member and Vice President of the Customs Tribunal on the terms and conditions mentioned in the said order. Clause 3 and clause 6 of the said order read as under :
3. The said post is permanent but the appointment will initially be temporary. 6. Unless Sh. S. Grover is confirmed as Vice-President, the Central Government may at any time revert him to his previous post by giving him one month s notice in this behalf. He will also have the option to revert tn his orimnal post by giving one month s notice. In the event of such reversion, his age of superannuation will be regulated by the general rules in force in this behalf.
( 4 ) A formal order of appointment of the petitioner as a member and Vice President was passed by the President on 22nd September, 1982, on the terms and conditions laid down in the Ministry s Memorandum of 14th September, 1982. As many as 18 persons were appointed as members ot the Customs Trtbunal and the same were gazetted. In the Government of India Gazette dated -11th October, 1982 the petitioner s name is to be found at serial No. 6. Similarly the names of three Vice Presidents were also gazetted in the same gazette and the petitioner was shown at Serial No. 3 with a designation of Vice President (Judicial ). The petitioner started presiding over the special bench from 8th December, 1982 onwards till the impugned order of reversion was passed.
( 5 ) THE petitioner challenges the order of 16th July, 1983, on various grounds. It is maintained that the Government had already decided to confirm the petitioner and therefore the Government was estopped from purporting to Act in terms ot the appointment letter. The impugned order is stated to be arbitrary and capricious. It is said to be penal in nature and also to have cast a stigma on the petitioner. The order is also said to have been passed for collateral and ulter
Swadeshi Cotton Mills v. U.O.I.
Govt. Branch Press v. D. B. Belliappa
Barium Chemicals Ltd. v. Company Law Board
Rohtas Industries Ltd. v. S.D.Agarwal
AI
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.