Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2014 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (5) TMI 972 - HC - Income TaxSelection process for three posts of the Vice-President of the ITAT – Petitioner not selected - Whether the manner of selection, including the decision-making process adopted by the Selection Committee, is consistent with the terms of the Service Rules or not – Held that:- The Selection Committee did not conduct interviews or meet the candidates at any point in the selection process, nor were orders written by the candidates in their capacity as members of the ITAT placed before the Selection Committee - The only material before the Selection Committee was the Annual Confidential Reports ("ACRs") of the candidates - Office Memorandum in question marks a departure from the previous nomenclature, and prescribes a clear procedure for ‘selection’, as grading followed by seniority, it is important first and foremost to note the terms of Rule 7C, which is the primary rule applicable. Seniority is not completely excluded from the selection process - The zone of consideration prepared as the first step in the process was on the basis of seniority, as the minutes of the Selection Committee clearly recorded. However, there is no independent requirement - either statutory or constitutional - to consider seniority - Even independently, given the array of responsibilities assumed by the Vice-President of the ITAT, the importance of merit cannot be downplayed in any manner - there was no comparison chart prepared by the Selection Committee, nor was any material other than the ACRs before it, the ACRs - as it appears from the record - constituted the only basis on which the decision was made – Thus, the ACR grading was important - The ACR remarks for the five years preceding the selection process indicate that Mr.Tolani had five ‘Very Good’ remarks, Mr. Yadav had one ‘Very Good’ and four ‘Good’ remarks. The Selection Committee was not bound by the ACRs, it adopted some other consideration in the absence of any material - The Selection Committee could have adopted the view that the petitioners were not merited, if it formed the opinion on the basis of other material present before it, as for example, sample judgments of the members, their disposal rates, cases turned on appeal etc. - If such a course had been followed, the assessment of the Selection Committee would lie outside the Court’s limited power of judicial review - no material was before the Selection Committee which could testify as to those factors, and since none of the candidates were interviewed by the Selection Committee (which did not have any occasion to interact with them), the comparative merit as judged by the ACRs leads to a conclusion contrary to that returned by the Selection Committee. Here, the Court recognizes that the Selection Committee - as an administrative body - does not have to give reasons for accepting the five candidates in question, and rejecting the two writ petitioners. A robust and comprehensive process that considers various factors that touch upon the merit of the candidates, thus, is crucial in such cases, especially given the high office to which they are to be selected - the Central Government’s position was that even though materials other than the character rolls (ACRs) of the candidates was not considered while at the same time the ACR gradings were not conclusive, it was also contended that given the wide experience in income tax matters of the Chairman, i.e. Justice Kapadia (who later became the Chief Justice of India) and his having considered numerous orders of the ITAT, as well as the experience of the President of ITAT - there was sufficient knowledge about the candidates merit, to warrant the selection. Members of tribunals such as the ITAT perform crucial judicial functions, which can have an adverse bearing on individuals, and at times, vast commercial and fiscal ramifications - the Central Government should seriously consider continuous oversight through the concerned High Courts, given that High Courts exercise appellate jurisdiction over the orders and proceedings of ITAT and its benches - Some reporting mechanism, preferably centralized, to oversee the quality of the orders of ITAT is essential because the President of ITAT’s powers over members of ITAT and Vice President are not appellate, they are administrative - Creation of this mechanism would result in adding a new and possibly crucial dimension to ensure greater scrutiny of ITAT and its orders and also provide a link in the decision making process of selection to senior judicial positions within ITAT – Decided against Petitioner.
|