TMI Blog2008 (7) TMI 25X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner and the Central Government are very high authorities and they have considered the representations of the appellant, so there is no bias - plea was not taken before Tribunal or HC so cannot be taken for the first time before us - 4724 OF 2008 - - - Dated:- 30-7-2008 - JUDGMEMT Markandey Katju, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal by special leave has been filed against the judgment o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Government of India by his letter dated 30.9.2004. 5. Before the Tribunal the appellant submitted that the adverse entry had been made malafide. This fact had been considered by the Tribunal in para 9 of its order and the Tribunal observed that the appellant had not brought to its notice any extraneous factor or reason as to why the concerned authority should have acted in a malafide manne ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ard the learned counsel for the parties, and we see no reason to interfere with the orders of the High Court or the Tribunal. This is not a case where the adverse entry was not communicated to the appellant. It was not only communicated but the appellant made representation against the adverse entry, which was considered by the Chief Commissioner, who rejected the representation by a detailed spea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the appellant was not aware of the good entries before and after the year 2000, and hence the appellant could not bring it to the notice of the Tribunal and the High Court. He also submitted that the entries before the year 2000 and after the year 2000 are good entries, and this shows that the isolated entry in the year 2000 was for extraneous considerations. 9. We are of the opinion that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it. Hence we cannot allow this plea to be taken before us. 11. The Chief Commissioner and the Central Government are very high authorities and they have considered the representations of the appellant. No bias has been attributed to the Chief Commissioner or to the Central Government. 12. For the reasons given above, we find no merit in this appeal and hence it is dismissed. No costs. . ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
