38.6c New Delhi, India, Sunday, August 14, 2022
Top Stories
Interviews Know The Law Book Reviews Videos
About Us Contact Us

Supreme Court hears an application to fill a TDSAT vacancy

By Lawstreet News Network      May 04, 2022      0 Comments      2,624 Views

Sr Adv Vikas Singh: Justice L Nageswara Rao led committee had recommended a name

Justice DY Chandrachud: Who is appearing for Union?

AG KK Venugopal: We have submitted a short note

DYC J: Yes the note does give a birds eye view.

DYC J: Yes the note does give a birds eye view.

AG: The member is now working in ITAT and that he was not appointed to TDSAT even though posts remained vacant. His name was one of the two names recommended by search cum selection committee

AG: Pursuant to vacancy circular issued in Nov 2021, Justice Rao had personal conversation with the members and now names are pending before ACC.

SC: The plea is concerned with 2020 selection. 2 were recommended and only 1 was appointed. what was the reason why he was overlooked?

AG: The tribunal reforms act empowers us to reject it. we will produce a file

SC: We dont shortlist a candidate with a negative ib report

SC: We recommend all only when IB has given a go ahead

AG: The govt then refers the matters to other departments, it is seen if there are Income tax matters pending against him then he is not appointed

SC: There has to be a valid reason for the rejection.

SC: Applicant was working as an accountant member in ITAT and has now retired in March 2022. Pursuant to a vacancy notification issued in May 2020 for appointment of two vacant positions in TDSAT

SC Name of candidate was recommended by SC search cum selection committee. Another vacancy appointment was flashed on November 2021 & SCSC again recommended the name.

SC: Court must be apprised of reasons which weighed in not appointing the applicant to the post advertised on May 2020 despite the recommendation by SCSC and thus a report be submitted. List next Wednesday

Sr Adv Arvind Datar: Ads were issued in 2020. Traditionally ITAT and TDSAT had retirement age of 62. In Madras Bar case ordinance was struck down and the tribunal reforms act now bodily copies the ordinance without even changing the punctuation etc. Here the case falls here only

Justice DY Chandrachud: It would have been nice if Justice L Nageswara Rao only heard this. we cannot stop the constitutional process of judges turning 65 you see.

Supreme Court of IndiaTDSAT Advocate Vikas Singh Justice L Nageswara RaoJustice DY Chandrachud ITAT Advocate Arvind DatarJustice ChandrachudAG KK Venugopal
Share this article:

Lawstreet News Network

Leave a feedback about this

Related Posts
View All




Lawstreet Advertisement

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email