Back
2026 Supreme(Online)(CAT) 5566
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH, MUMBAI
Umesh Gajankush, Judicial Member, S.N. Srivastava, Administrative Member
1348/2016
OA No. 588/2016|MA No. 536/2019|OA No. 590/2016|MA No. 537/2019
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Aniket Singh
For the Respondents: Swetabja Mohdal, Rui Rodrigues
The Tribunal held that when subsequent administrative orders create a new cause of action during the pendency of an application, the appropriate remedy is to file a fresh consolidated application rather than amending the original one.
Headnote:(A) Civil Procedure - Amendment of Pleadings - Subsequent Events - Where a new cause of action arises from a subsequent administrative order during the pendency of an application, the court may permit the filing of a fresh consolidated application rather than amending the existing one to avoid altering the original cause of action. (Para 12)
(B) Service Law - Seniority - Inter-se seniority of direct recruits and promotees - Implementation of judicial precedents - The determination of seniority based on Supreme Court judgments is subject to subsequent clarifications, administrative advisories, and decisions of larger benches. (Para 11)
Issues: Whether the applicants were entitled to amend their Original Applications to include challenges to a subsequent administrative letter issued during the pendency of the proceedings.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. applicants seek seniority and amendment of oas due to a subsequent administrative letter. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. respondents oppose amendment citing a new cause of action and evolving legal precedents. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 3. court observes the complexity of inter-se seniority and pending larger bench decisions. (Para 10 , 11) |
| 4. mas rejected and oas dismissed with liberty to file a fresh consolidated application. (Para 12 , 13 , 14) |
VIJAY Digitally signed KUMAR by VIJAY KUMAR VERMA VERMA
VIJAY Digitally signed (By Adv: Shri Aniket Singh) KUMAR by VIJAY K VU ERM MAR A
VIJAY Digitally signed KUMAR by VIJAY KUMAR VERMA VERMA
ORDER
Per : Umesh Gajankush, Member (J)
1. This order shall govern the disposal of MA No. 537/2019 in OA No. 588/2016 and MA No. 536/2019 in OA No. 590 of 2016, which are the Misc. Applications filed by the applicants.
VIJAY Digitally signed KUMAR by VIJAY KUMAR VERMA VERMA
2. Both the learned counsels have argued their case in respect of MA No. 536/2019, as similar amendments are proposed in both the OAs and therefore, facts stated in M.A. No. 536/2019 filed in O.A. No. 588/2016 are taken up for consideration.
3. By filing OA 588/2016, the applicants have prayed for following reliefs:
(i) This Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to call for the records of the case from the Respondents and after examining the same quash and set aside, impugned letter dated 13-11-2015 as well as the final seniority list of Inspector of Income Tax published vide letter dated 07-09- 2015 qua the Applicants;
(ii) This Hon’ble Tribunal may further be pleased to hold and declare that the Applicants are entitled to assigned seniority in the grade of Inspector of Income Tax for the recruitment year 1997-98 and accordingly the Respondents be directed to include the names of the Applicants in the final seniority list published vide letter dated 07-09-2015 by placing Applicant no. 1 between serial numbers 662 and 663 and Applicant No. 2 between sr. nos. 664 and 665.
(iii) As a consequence of assignment of seniority to the Respondents be directed to fix the seniority of applicants on the post of Income-tax Officer, in the year 2006-07 as per their legitimate seniority in the grade of Inspector, irrespective of their actual promotion on subsequent date.
(iv) Costs of the Application be provided for;
(v) Any other order or direction which the Hon’ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the applicants.”
VIJAY Digitally signed KUMAR by VIJAY KUMAR VERMA VERMA
4. The aforesaid OA was filed on 08.08.2016. The official respondents have filed an additional affidavit on 21.07.2017 and reply dated 21.11.2017.
5. Thereafter, the applicant also file rejoidner on 09.03.2018. Thereafter, MA No. 536/2019 was filed in which it is stated that the present OA was filed seeking seniority in the grade of Inspector of Income Tax from the vacancy year 1997-98 towards correct implementation of judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in N R Parmar. The Applicant has erroneously been assigned seniority of the year 2001-02 towards implementation of the said judgment. Now during pendency of the present OA, CBDT has issued letter dated 27.05.2019 inter alia directing that the judgement in N.R Parmar would be implemented only prospectively i.e., w.e.f. 27.11.2012. Thus, by the said letter dated 27.05.2019, implementation of judgement in N.R Parmar in respect of the Applicant is sought to be withdrawn. Therefore, it is necessary to challenge the said letter dated 27.05.2019 in the present O.A. by amending the same. The cause of action for the applicant in respect of letter dated 27.05.2019 flows out of the original cause of action espoused in the present O.A. Therefore, amendment is necessitated on account of subsequent event. Amendment is necessary for the purpose of determining the real question of controversy between the parties. Alon
