Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, Govt of India and Ors. v. Nareshkumar Rajaram Dingia
Case brief
What is this about?
COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL…
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
WRIT PETITION NO. 2776 OF 2012
Union of India & Others .. Petitioner
v/s.
Nareshkumar Rajaram Dingia ..Respondent
Mr.S.B.Shetye for the Petitioner. None for the Respondent
CORAM : A.M.KHANWILKAR & R.Y.GANOO, JJ. DATED : 18th OCTOBER, 2012
P.C. :
authority to do something which the Authority has already considered while deciding the proposal of the respondent regarding permanency. The Tribunal, by the impugned Order has directed the Authority to reconsider
the case of the respondent by duly taking into consideration the services rendered by the respondent with Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Pune along with the services rendered by him in the office of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-III, Pune. According to the
pps 1/2
petitioner, the Authority has already considered the fact that the respondent was in service with Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Pune, and inspite of that, rejected the proposal of the respondent for permanency. This factual position was asserted by the petitioner in the written statement in para 9 and 10. Since the grievance is about incorrect assumption by the Tribunal while remanding the case of the respondent for reconsideration, it will be open to the petitioner to bring that factual error to the notice of the Tribunal by way of review petition, if so advised.
[R.Y.GANOO, J.] [A.M.KHANWILKAR, J.]
pps 2/2
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Tribunal erred in directing reconsideration of the respondent's permanency proposal given the Authority's prior consideration of the same facts.
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Tribunal's order in the public servant's permanency matter.
Union of India & Others
Nareshkumar Rajaram Dingia
A.M.KHANWILKAR
R.Y.GANOO
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court