2015 (3) TMI 271 - HC - Income Tax

Restructuring of the Income Tax Department challenged - Held that - When restructuring of a department is carried out based on the institutional need to augment the productivity of that department aiming at proper governance attuned with the change of timer, it goes without saying that there is always a chance of certain surplusages or flying of the frills, which have to be excused from judicial review, because they are inexcusable administrative exigencies, where the prime requirement is the paramount public purpose sought to be achieved, rather than a critical examination on the basis of relative and comparable personal aspirations of individual employees, or even a group of them. If a rational and reasonable balance is struck in the modality adopted for restructuring, the judiciary would loathe interfere with such process, primarily because such restructuring; including the manner in which the restructuring is to be done; is a matter purely in the realm of administration. That notwithstanding, as rightly noted by the learned Tribunal, no situation of injustice, even to any particular class of employees, was made out. The challenge to the impugned restructuring and the order of the Tribunal, therefore, fails. W.P. dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Challenging dismissal of original application before Central Administrative Tribunal under Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 regarding restructuring of Income Tax Department.

Analysis:
The petitioner, a Tax Assistant, challenged the dismissal of the original application filed before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam Bench, under Article 227 of the Constitution of India. The issue stemmed from an anomaly during the restructuring of the Income Tax Department due to the induction of information technology. The Chairman, CBDT, communicated the decision to merge certain posts and create new designations, which was challenged before the Tribunal.

The Tribunal dismissed the challenge, stating that the policy itself was not under scrutiny, and no specific injustice was demonstrated. The petitioner argued that relief against the policy decision was included in the original application, but the Court found the reasoning behind the decision rational and complete, devoid of inequity or injustice. The Tribunal's decision was upheld as the restructuring was deemed necessary due to technological advancements and aimed at enhancing departmental productivity.

The Court emphasized that when restructuring a department to align with technological advancements and improve governance, certain administrative exigencies may arise, which are beyond judicial review. As long as a rational balance is maintained in the restructuring process, the judiciary refrains from interference. In this case, no specific injustice to any employee class was established, leading to the dismissal of the challenge against the restructuring and the Tribunal's decision.

Ultimately, the Court dismissed the writ petition, upholding the Tribunal's decision regarding the restructuring of the Income Tax Department.