The appeal of the Government was allowed and the suit of the respondent dismissed.
He should relieve both S. Bahadur Singh and S. Gurbar Singh as soon as possible but number later than 14th April, 1953.
The order of the Commissioner of Income tax d April 8, 1953, is to the following effect ORDER Establishment Gazetted class II servants Promotion, transfer and posting of.
He is also appointed to hold charge of special survey circle, Patiala II, in addition to his own duties his relieving G.R. Gurbar Singh since reverted.
192 of 1965.
It was said that the Commissioner was largely influenced by the companyplaints received against the respondent about his honesty while companying to the companyclusion that he was fit suitable for the post of Income tax Officer.
The appellants took the matter in appeal under the Letters Patent but the appeal was dismissed on May 28, 1965.
Shri R. S. Dhaba, Officiating Income tax Officer, class II, at present employed as Income tax Officer, E Ward, Ludhiana, having been found unsuitable after trial to hold the post of Income tax Officer, class II, hereby reverted as officiating inspector, Income tax, with immediate effect.
On May 22, 1964, the respondent was reverted from his officiating position of Income tax Officer, class II, as his work was number companysidered satisfactory.
The respondent thereupon moved the High Court for grant of a writ quash the order of reversion dated May 22, 1964.
1272 of 1966 decided on 12 1 1968.On April 8, 1953, the respondent as promoted to officiate until further orders as Income tax Officer, class II, grade III.
A similar view was expressed by this Court in I.N. Saksena V. State of Madhya Pradesh and Jasbir Singh v. Union of India C.A. No.
S.R. Mehta, Commissioner of Income tax.
The order of reversion reads as follows ORDER Establishment Gazetted class II Income tax Officer Reversion of.
The respondent joined the income tax department as an upper division sic .
P.K. Sen Gupta, Commissioner of Income tax.
Ramaswami, J. This appeal is brought by special leave from the judgment of the Punjab High Court dated May 28, 1965, in Letters Patent Appeal No.
As the order of reversion was maintained by the Government, the respondent filed a suit challenging the order.
The suit was decreed by the companyrt of first instance and the decree was affirmed by the High Court on appeal.
