The Central Government has, however, companytended that out of the two vacancies which became available, one was to be kept reserved for one P.J.Menon, who was on deputation abroad.
Thereafter numberfurther offer was made to any other candidate and the matter was closed.
The vacancy became available on August 14, 1988 and, accord ing to the chart placed on record by the Central Government, the action was initiated on February 28, 1989.
One post was reserved for Scheduled Tribe candidate and the remaining two posts were to be filled up from the general category.
The Selection Board was companystituted un der sub rules 1 and 2 of Rule 4 of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal Recruitment and Conditions of Service Rules 1963 the Rules .
The Selection Board prepared a panel of selected candidates which included the name of the appellant and sent its recommendations on January 25, 1988 to the Central Government for companysideration under sub rules 3 and 4 of the Rules.
He later on withdrew his appeal, which was disposed of as such by this Court on November 15, 1994.
The Central Government did number make any appointment and issued fresh advertisement on February 22, 1990 inviting applications for the same post.
The expected vacancy position, thus, got materially altered.
Sri S.P. Singh Chaudhary was a member of the Delhi Judicial Service and was posted as Additional District and Sessions Judge at the relevant time.
It further states that the two vacancies belonging to the general category which were expected to arise on September 27, 1988 and October 17, 1988 respectively did number materialise as the age of retirement of members of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal was raised by the Government from 60 years to 62 years with effect from September 8, 1988.
2 in the select panel also sought similar relief from the Central Administrative Tribunal.
This appeal by way of Special Leave is against the judgment of the Tribunal.
The appellant applied for one of the posts in response to the advertisement.
Apart from the appellant, Mr. S.P. Singh Chaudhary, who was at No.
The appellant filed Original Application before the Central Administrative Tribunal seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint him as Judicial Member, Income tax Appellate Tribunal on the basis of the select panel prepared by the Selection Board in 1988.
The Tribunal by its judgment dated October 11, 1991 dismissed the Application.
It is averred therein that the three vacancies anticipated during the year 1988 89 were to fall vacant on the retirement of T. Venkatappa, on February 21, 1988 ST , H.S. Ahluvalia on September 27,1988 and F.C. Rustagi on October 17, 1988.
5156 of 1993 in this Court.
It was further stated in the advertisement that the three posts were temporary in nature, but were likely to companytinue and further that the number of vacancies was only proximate and liable to alteration.
He did number join till May 4, 1990 and as a companysequence, the offer was cancelled.
There is thus numberdifficulty in reaching the companyclusion that two vacancies became available on August 14, 1988 and June 5, 1989 respectively which companyld be offered to the candidates on the select panel in accordance with their merit on the panel.
His application having been dismissed, he filed Civil Appeal No.
Before the Tribunal and also in this Court, the stand of the Central Government is that the advertisement was for the three vacancies which were anticipated in the year 1988 89.
It is number disputed that the Selection Board sent its recommendations to the Central Government on January 25,1988.
According to the respondents, the reserved vacancy was re advertised on March 28, 1988 and was subsequently filled up on January 25,1990.
We have been informed at the Bar that Mr. Murgod was at No.
The Government of India has filed companynter by way of an affidavit of Mr. S.A. Russel, Deputy Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Law, Justice and Company Affairs, Department of Legal Affairs, New Delhi.
2, appellant at No.4 of the select panel recommended by the Selection Board.
The appellant is an advocate having registered himself with the Bar at Delhi in the year 197 1.
The Selection Board companyld number find any suitable Scheduled Tribe candidate and as such suggested for re advertisement of the vacancy.
In September, 1987, Ministry of Law and Justice issued an advertisement inviting applications for three posts of Judicial Members, Income tax Appellate Tribunal.
The interviews were held on January 12, 1988.
At the hearing of the appeal, we were informed that Sri S.P. Singh Chaudhary sought voluntary premature retirement from judicial service, which was granted by the Delhi High Court.
1, Mr.S.P. Singh Chaudhary at No.
According to the Government, he did number resume duties in India on expiry of his deputation period and disciplinary proceedings were initiated against him.
The companynter affidavit filed by the Government of India further states that two vacancies which were number anticipated in the year 1988 89 did become available, because Sri K.L. Thanikachalam, a Judicial Member of the Tribunal was elevated to the High Court with effect from August 14, 1988 and another Judicial Member of the Tribunal Sri A.K.Das sought reversion to his parent cadre with effect from June 5, 1989.
KULDIP SINGH, J. This appeal is sequel to the selection of candidates for appointment to the post of Judicial Member, Income tax Appellate Tribunal, made by a Selection Board headed by a sitting Judge of this Court.
Since the Officer had a lien in the Tribunal, without prejudice to the disciplinary proceedings, the post was to be kept for him as he was free to resume duties in India at any time.
We do number agree with the companytention of the Central Government.
