Centre set to challenge CAT relief to sacked IRS officers

NEW DELHI: The Centre is set to challenge a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) ruling providing relief to two dismissed revenue service officers, arguing that the cases have not been heard properly and the tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction.
At least four officers of the 27 who have been compulsorily retired have moved CAT, seeking a reversal of the order. With regard to the CAT order, the government is set to argue that a single member bench erred in its actions.
The government is of the view that Kolkata bench should not have heard the case as the officers first need to seek a review of the decision by a representation committee. If a petition is filed in CAT, only a division bench, comprising the judicial and administrative members need to hear the case and a lone member cannot decide the issue.
Official sources said it was unusual for the bench not to involve another member who was available in Kolkata. They said the grounds for dismissal were well documented and the government is ready to argue its case before the high court and even the Supreme Court as it was determined to act against the officials who were held unfit for service.
In a case filed by G Sree Harsha, CAT’s Kolkata bench stayed his compulsory retirement and ordered continuation in service. In his order, the judicial member ruled that “it would be highly improper to keep the applicant out of his employment to earn his livelihood merely on the basis of his involvement in criminal case which is yet to reach finality”.
Times News Network
New Delhi: The Centre is set to challenge a Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) ruling providing relief to two dismissed revenue service officers, arguing that the cases have not been heard properly and the tribunal exceeded its jurisdiction.
At least four officers of the 27 who have been compulsorily retired have moved CAT, seeking a reversal of the order. With regard to the CAT order, the government is set to argue that a single member bench erred in its actions.
The government is of the view that Kolkata bench should not have heard the case as the officers first need to seek a review of the decision by a representation committee. If a petition is filed in CAT, only a division bench, comprising the judicial and administrative members need to hear the case and a lone member cannot decide the issue.
Official sources said it was unusual for the bench not to involve another member who was available in Kolkata. They said the grounds for dismissal were well documented and the government is ready to argue its case before the high court and even the Supreme Court as it was determined to act against officials who were held unfit for service.
In a case filed by G Sree Harsha, CAT’s Kolkata bench stayed his compulsory retirement and ordered continuation in service. In his order, the judicial member ruled that “it would be highly improper to keep the applicant out of his employment to earn his livelihood merely on the basis of his involvement in criminal case which is yet to reach finality”.
Harsha, a commissioner-rank officer, was posted in Chennai, when the order for his compulsory retirement was issued. A similar ruling has also been given in a case filed by Ashok R Mahida, who was posted as additional commissioner in Kolkata.
The cases of SS Bisht, a customs and central excise officer who was posted as an assistant commissioner in Bhubaneswar, is to be decided by CAT, as is the case with Ram Kumar Bhargava, an income tax officer posted in Kanpur.