Allowed

Union of India v. Sri. Manjunath I Pujar

Karnataka HC9 Oct 2023WP/9419/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition filed under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution challenging the non-speak and arbitrary nature of an order passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal. The Court allowed the petition, set aside the impugned order, and remanded the matter to CAT to permit the Union of India to file statement of objections.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition allowed; order dated 23.01.2020 set aside; matter remanded to CAT with request to permit Union of India to file statement of objections; Union of India to file objections on 15.11.2023.

Union of India Vs Sri. Manjunath I Pujar — Writ and Judicial Review | Karnataka HC (2023)

¶1

¶2

NC: 2023:KHC:36673-DB WP No. 9419 of 2022

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶4

DATED THIS THE 9^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2023

¶5

PRESENT

¶6

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE P.S.DINESH KUMAR

¶7

AND

¶8

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE T.G. SHIVASHANKARE GOWDA

¶9

WRIT PETITION NO. 9419 OF 2022 (S-CAT)

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

UNION OF INDIA THROUGH THE FINANCE SECRETARY MINISTRY OF FINANCE, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVT. OF INDIA NEW DELHI-110 001

¶12

CHAIRMAN CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001

¶13

PR. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX KARNATAKA AND GOA REGION, C.R. BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001

¶14

…PETITIONERS

¶15

(BY SRI. B. PRAMOD, ADV.)

¶16

Digitally signed by MALA K N

¶17

Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶18

AND:

¶19

SRI. MANJUNATH I PUJAR S/O. SHRI. ISHWARAPPA PUJAR AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS R/O. S-77, GOLDEN ENCLAVE OLD AIRPORT ROAD BENGALURU-560 017 …RESPONDENT

¶20

(BY SRI. TARSEM CHAND GUPTA, ADV.)

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO i) DECLARE THAT THE ORDER DATED 23/01/2020 (ANNEXUREA) PASSED BY THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, BENGALURU BENCH, BENGALURU IN OA NO.170/00251/2019

¶22

2 - NC: 2023:KHC:36673-DB WP No. 9419 of 2022

¶23

IS NON SPEAKING, WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AND ARBITRARY.

¶24

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR HEARING, THIS DAY, P.S.DINESH KUMAR J., MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

ORDER

¶26

This writ petition is filed seeking declaration that order dated 23.01.2020 passed by the CAT¹ , Bengaluru in O.A.No.170/00251/2019 is non-speaking and arbitrary.

¶27

Heard Shri B. Pramod, learned Advocate for the petitioners and Shri Tarsem Chand Gupta, learned Advocate for the respondent.

¶28

Shri B. Pramod submitted that Union of India had not filed their statement of objections before the Central Administrative Tribunal ('CAT' for short) and the matter has been disposed of without the statement of objections being filed by the Union of India and prayed that an opportunity may be given to file statement of objections and to argue the matter.

¶29

1 Central Administrative Tribunal

¶30

3 - NC: 2023:KHC:36673-DB WP No. 9419 of 2022

¶31

Shri Tarsem Chand Gupta, learned Advocate

¶32

for respondent submits that he has no objections for

¶33

the same and prayed that the matter may be remitted

¶34

to the CAT for adjudication on merits.

¶35

We have perused the impugned order.

¶36

CAT has noticed that since there was no reply

¶37

by Union of India, there was no other way other than to grant the order. Thus, the impugned order is based

¶38

on the default on the part of Union of India.

¶39

In that view of the matter, this matter needs

¶40

to be heard on merits before CAT. In the result, the following:

¶41

i) Writ petition is allowed .

¶42

ii) Order dated 23.01.2020 is set aside.

¶43

iii) The matter is remanded to CAT with a request to permit the Union of India to file statement of objections.

¶44

¶45

NC: 2023:KHC:36673-DB WP No. 9419 of 2022

¶46

iv) Learned Advocate for petitioners undertakes to file statement of objections on first date of hearing.

¶47

v) By consent of learned Advocates on both sides, without notice, parties shall appear before CAT on 15.11.2023 and on the said day, Union of India shall file the statement of objections and the same shall be taken on record.

¶48

vi) We request CAT to dispose of the matter as expeditiously as possible.

¶49

In view of disposal of the petition, pending

¶50

interlocutory applications, if any, do not survive for consideration and they stand disposed of .

No costs.

Sd/JUDGE

Sd/JUDGE

PA CT:HS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 60

Union of India v. Sri. Manjunath I Pujar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India v. Sri. Manjunath I Pujar

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sri Munihanumaiah Vs Smt Venkatamma

Sri T Ramaiah Vs Sri B K Ramanna

Sri. R. Manjunath Reddy @ Manjunatha Reddy Vs Smt. Nagaveni .N

Sri M Shivananda Vs the State of Karnataka

Aboobakkar Vs N. Dinesh Shetty

Mr. Ismail Khan Vs Mrs. Margaret