High CourtDivision BenchAppeal disposed of

A.S. SASTRY v. CHIEF COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX AND ORS.

Case / Petition Number:Civil Appeal No. 1527 of 2007

Case Details & Bench

Court
High Court
Hon'ble Judges
  • Dr. AR. Lakshmanan
  • AL TAMAS KABIR
Judgment Date
2007-03-20
Court Decision / Holding
The Supreme Court directed the Central Administrative Tribunal to take up OA No. 788/2005 on priority and dispose of it within two months of receiving a copy of the order; the respondent authorities were directed to immediately pay the entire arrears of pension and continue to pay the pension; if Sastry seeks permission to travel abroad, the Tribunal should dispose of such application on merits and in accordance with law; the appeal stands disposed of with no costs.
Final Disposition
Appeal disposed of

Parties to the Case

Appellants / Petitioners

  • A.S. Sastry

Respondents

  • Chief Commissioner of Income Tax
  • Ors.

Legal Representation & Advocates

Counsels for Petitioners

  • • TL.V. Iyer
  • • G. Ramakrishna Prasad
  • • Suyodhan Byrapaneni

Counsels for Respondents

  • • Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhatti
  • • B.V. Balaram Das
  • • Shweta

Case Synopsis & Summary

The appellant, A.S. Sastry, retired on 30 November 2005 after facing a departmental inquiry for charged misconduct. The charges were framed before retirement, and Sastry challenged them in the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), with the matter subsequently pending before CAT for an extended period. Sastry moved the High Court for directions to CAT to expeditiously hear and dispose of OA No. 788/2005, and for directions to release his pension during the pendency of the inquiry. The High Court directed CAT to consider the request for early hearing and to expeditiously dispose of the matter, and directed the authorities to release pension. CAT did not grant early hearing. Sastry appealed to the Supreme Court, contending that the prolonged pendency and lack of pension payments violate his rights and financial security. The respondents urged that CAT has a large backlog and that early hearing cannot be guaranteed; they argued the matter should be dealt with in due course in accordance with law. The Supreme Court held that the CAT must prioritize OA No. 788/2005, dispose of it within two months, order payment of all pension arrears and continued pension, and entertain any travel-abroad request on merits. The appeal was disposed of with no costs.

Submissions & Arguments

Contentions of Appellants / Petitioners

The appellant contends that he was retired on 30.11.2005 while a departmental inquiry was pending and that the CAT has not expeditiously disposed of OA No. 788/2005 despite High Court directions. He seeks expeditious disposal, pension arrears from retirement, and permission to travel abroad to meet family, to be considered promptly by the CAT.

Contentions of Respondents

The respondents argue that CAT faces a large backlog; the OA was pending among many matters, and the Tribunal’s 20.03.2006 direction to renew early-hearing after three months reflected docket constraints. They contend that expeditious disposal is feasible only within the framework of law and CAT’s backlog, and that High Court directions cannot override CAT’s pendency without due process.

Diagnostic Tool

Beta

Does this judgment govern your specific facts?

Don't risk relying on a distinguishable precedent. Enter your facts or proposition below. We will test it against A.S. SASTRY v. CHIEF COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX AND ORS. and instantly map out authorities that support, challenge, or govern your position.

Extracted Judgment Text

Exact text extracted from official judgment records.

~ A B + " _+-_ ~ ## A.S. SASTRY _v._ CHIEF COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX AND ORS. MARCH 20, 2007 [DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN AND AL TAMAS KABIR, JJ.] ~. _Service Law:_ > _Pension-Petition filed by pensioner before his retirement from service_ c _in Central Administrative Tribunal against charges in a departmental inquiryFiling of a petition before High Court for directions to CAT for early hearingHigh Court directing CAT to consider the request of the incumbent for early hearing of the matter and also directed the authorities to release pensionCAT declined to grant early hearing nor pension was released by the_ D _authorities-On appeal, Held: Tribunal is directed to dispose of the matter within two months-Authorities are directed to release pension and also to make payment of arrears of pension-In regard to the permission to travel abroad to meet other family members as sought by the incumbent before this Court, incumbent may file an application before the Tribunal seeking such permission-Tribunal is also directed to dispose of the same at the earliest_ E _in accordance with law._ AppeJ•ant was retired from service on 30.11.2005. Before his retirement, in a departmental inquiry charges were framed against him, which were challenged by the incumbent in the Central Administrative Tribunal (CA 1). Since then. the petition is pending in CAT. He also made a prayer before F the High Court for directions to CAT for expeditious disposal of the matter. High Court directed the authorities to release his pension and CAT to consider his request for early hearing. In spite of directions by the High Court, CAT was not inclined to grant early hearing in the matter. Hence the present appeal. ~: Disposing of the appeal, the Court HELD: 1.1. The Central Administrative Tribunal is directed to take up OA No.788/2005, which is pending before it, on priority basis and dispose of the same within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of the Order 245 G H SUPREME COURT REPORTS (2007] 4 S.C.R. 246 .Ai- A from this Court. !Para 411247-B-CJ 1.2. Respondent-authority is directed to immediately arrange to pay the entire arrears of pension to the incumbent since his retirement from 8ervice and continue to pay the pension. I Para 511247-C-DJ B 1.3. Request of the incumbent to travel abroad to see the members of his family was not accepted by the Tribunal during the pendency of the proceedings. In this connection, the Tribunal is directed that if the matter is not disposed of within two months as directed by this Court, the incumbent may also make an application to the Tribunal seeking permission to travel C abroad and if such an application is filed, the same shall be disposed of on merits and in accordance with law. (Para 6) (247-D-El ## CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Civil Appeal No. 1527 of2007. From the final Judgment and Order dated 17.4.2006 of the High Court D of Judicature of Andhra Pradesh at Hyderabad in Writ Petition No. 7369 of 2006. TL.V. Iyer, G. Ramakrishna Prasad and Suyodhan Byrapaneni for the Appellant. E Gp. Capt. Karan Singh Bhatti, B.V. Balaram Das and Shweta for the Respondent. > The Judgment of the Court was delivered by ## DR. AR. LAKSHMANAN, J. I. Leave granted. F 2. Heard Mr.T.L.V.Iyer, learned senior counsel for the appellant and Gp.Capt.Karn Singh Bhatti; learned counsel for the respondents. ,.+ ...._ 3. We h_ave perused the order impugned in this appeal. 4. According to the appellant, he is retired from service on 30.11.2005. G He is facing a departmental inquiry and the same is penciing for a very long time without being finally disposed of. He has also challenged the charges framed against him and the said case is also pending before .the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad. Before the High Court, he also made a prayer for expeditious disposal of the matter pending before the Central H Administrative Tribunal. The High Court directed the Central Administrative :..,. 247 A.S. SASTRY "· nuEF COMMNR. OF INCOME TAX [LAKSHMANAN,J.] Tribunal to consider the request made by the appellant and dispose of the A matter at an early date. Thereafter, an application was filed before the Tribunal to expedite hearing which was disposed of on 20.03.2006 stating that there were large number of matters pending prior to the OA filed by the appellant and, at that stage, it was not inclined to grant early hearing in the matter and that the applicant may renew his request for early hearing after three months. B This order was passed by the Tribunal on 20.03.2006. The reasoning given by the Tribunal for not taking up the matter at an early date is not acceptable to us. The appellant has already superannuated on 30.11.2005. We, therefore, direct the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad to take up OA No.788/ 2005 on priority basis and dispose of the same within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order from this Court. C 5. The High Court also while disposing of the Writ Petition directed the respondent herein to pay the pension during the pendency of inquiry. It is stated by the learned counsel for the appellant that the said direction has not been complied with. We, therefore, direct the respondent to immediately arrange to pay the entire arrears of pension after retirement and continue to D pay the same. 6. Learned counsel for the appellant states that even though a request has already been made to travel abroad, i.e., to U.S.A. to see the members of his family but the same was not accepted during the pendency of the proceedings. If the matter is not disposed of within two months as directed E by us now, the appellant may also make an application to the Tribunal seeking permission to travel abroad and if such an application is filed, the same shall be disposed of on merits and in accordance with law. 7. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly. F 8. No costs. S.K.S. Appeal disposed of.