Dismissed

Dr. Deepak Saran v. Union of India & Anr.

Delhi HC5 Apr 2024W.P.(C)/5019/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition sought mandamus for out-of-turn disposal of the petitioner's pending first appeal. Following its earlier dismissal of an identical petition and the Supreme Court's Constitution Bench caution against time-bound disposal directions, the High Court dismissed the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition dismissed; rights reserved to pursue application for expeditious disposal of the appeal before the concerned authority.

Dr. Deepak Saran Vs Union of India & Anr. — Income Tax | Delhi HC (2024)

¶1

$~79

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- W.P.(C) 5019/2024

¶4

DR. DEEPAK SARAN ..... Petitioner

¶5

Through: Mr. Varun Jain, Adv.

¶6

versus

¶7

UNION OF INDIA & ANR. ..... Respondents

¶8

Through: Mr. Ashish Batra, SPC along with Ms. Pooja Batra, Adv. for R-1/UOI.

¶9

Mr. Prashant Meharchandani, SSC along with Mr. Akshat Singh, JSC, Ms. Ritika Vohra and Mr. Utkarsh Kandpal, Advs. for IT Department.

¶10

CORAM:

¶11

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE YASHWANT VARMA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV

¶12

O R D E R % 05.04.2024

¶13

CM APPL 20532/2024 (Exemption)

¶14

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

¶15

The application stands disposed of.

¶16

W.P.(C) 5019/2024

¶17

We note that while dealing with an identical writ petition seeking the framing of out of turn disposal of appeals, we had dismissed WP(C) 4773/2024 recording the following reasons:-

¶18

“1. This writ petition has been preferred seeking the following reliefs:-

¶19

This is a digitally signed order.

¶20

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2024 at 12:48:48

¶21

“a) To issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus and/or any other appropriate writ/order/direction to the effect that the respondent no.1 be directed to decide the first appeal as filed by the petitioner on merits and accordingly pass a speaking order thereto.

¶22

b) Pass such other Writ, Order or Direction or any other Appropriate Writ, Order or Direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit and proper.

¶23

c) Award costs of the petition in favor of the petitioners and against the respondents.”

¶24

Bearing in mind the fact that the petitioner fails to disclose or assert that the first appeal preferred by the writ petitioner is the oldest pending before the concerned First Appellate Authority, we find no justification to frame a peremptory direction for its out of turn disposal. We must bear in mind that in the absence of adequate details with respect to the status of the board of a particular appellate authority, it would be wholly incorrect for this Court to invoke its extraordinary jurisdiction and pass directions granting precedence to one matter over the other. It is ultimately for the appellate authority to manage its board bearing in mind the vintage of matters pending before it and structuring hearings accordingly.

¶25

We also bear in mind the note of caution which stands rendered by the Constitution Bench of the Supreme Court in the case of High Court Bar Association, Allahabad v. State of U.P. and Others [2024 SCC OnLine SC 207] where the Court had noted the deleterious impact that such directions may have. The relevant paragraphs of the said decision are culled out hereinbelow:-

¶26

“41. Therefore, constitutional Courts should not normally fix a time-bound schedule for disposal of cases pending in any Court. The pattern of pendency of various categories of cases pending in every Court, including High Courts, is different. The situation at the grassroots level is better known to the judges of the concerned Courts. Therefore, the issue of giving out-of-turn priority to certain cases should be best left to the concerned Courts. The orders fixing the outer limit for the disposal of cases should be passed only in exceptional circumstances to meet extraordinary situations.

¶27

There is another important reason for adopting the said approach. Not every litigant can easily afford to file proceedings in the constitutional Courts. Those litigants who can afford to approach the constitutional Courts cannot be allowed to take undue advantage by getting an order directing out-of-turn disposal of their cases while all other litigants patiently wait in the queue for their turn to come. The Courts, superior in the judicial hierarchy, cannot interfere with the dayto-day functioning of the other Courts by directing that only

¶28

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2024 at 12:48:48

¶29

certain cases should be decided out of turn within a time frame. In a sense, no Court of law is inferior to the other. This Court is not superior to the High Courts in the judicial hierarchy. Therefore, the Judges of the High Courts should be allowed to set their priorities on a rational basis. Thus, as far as setting the outer limit is concerned, it should be best left to the concerned Courts unless there are very extraordinary circumstances.”

¶30

[Emphasis supplied]

¶31

The petition consequently fails and shall stand dismissed. This order, however, shall not preclude the writ petitioner from moving the concerned authority for expeditious disposal.”

¶32

Accordingly, and following the aforesaid, we dismiss this writ petition subject to rights being reserved in favour of the writ petitioner to pursue any application for expeditious disposal that may have been made.

¶33

YASHWANT VARMA, J.

¶34

PURUSHAINDRA KUMAR KAURAV, J.

¶35

APRIL 05, 2024/ RW

¶36

This is a digitally signed order.

¶37

The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 09/04/2024 at 12:48:48

Dr. Deepak Saran v. Union of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Dr. Deepak Saran v. Union of India & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Itc Limited Vs New Delhi Municipal Council & Anr.

Prakritishri Aldaan & Anr. Vs Deepika Mittal

Delhi Jal Board Contractors Welfare Association Regd. Vs Delhi Jal Board & Anr.

Devendra Kumar Sharma Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 13-1, & Ors.

Telenor South Asia Investment Pte Ltd. Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax

Shashwata Dashora Vs Jamia Millia Islamia

Food Corporation of India Khanauri, Sangrur (Pb.) Vs Regional Provident Fund Commissioner Bathinda (Pb.)

Meenakshi & Anr. Vs Union of India & Ors.

Devendra Kumar Sharma Vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle 13-1, & Ors.

Honda Trading Corporation India Private Limited Vs Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax & Ors.

Prime Asset Reconstruction Company Limited Vs Central Board of Direct Tax & Ors.

Ravinder Kaur Vs Income Tax Officer and Another

Sunil Malhotra Vs Acit Circle 61(1) Delhi & Anr.

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax -1 Vs Abhirvey Projects Private Limited