Subject: Proper scrutiny of Tribunal Orders – Regarding.
Kind attention is invited to Tribunal”s final order1 vs. M/s Associated Engineering dismissing the department”s appeal for want of proper authorisation. The Tribunal, in para 2 of its impugned judgment has observed as under:-
“From the perusal of the order we find that the Superintendent has placed the draft appeal along with the grounds of appeal and put up for approval with the authorisation letter before the Collector. There is no indication whether Collector had applied his mind with reference to the impugned order for filling appeal or not. There was no mention of his approval for filing the appeal. After applying his mind he should give authorisation in favour of the concerned officer for filing the appeal. But in the instant case even authorisation was also placed before him along with draft appeal without taking his consent.”
The Commissioner concerned has recommended for filing a special leave petition against the said order of the Tribunal on the ground that Cegat order does not appear legal and correct.
The recommendation of the Commissioner for filing a special leave petition in this case has since been examined by the Board. The Board has observed that amount involved in this case is of the order of Rs. 14,920/- (Demand) and the Commissioner has already filed Reference Application. In such a situation filing of Civil Appeal is not the alternative remedy. Further if there was no proper authorisation, Cegat Order is correct and no C.A. Can ever be justified. In fact, Commissioner has wasted so much time and efforts in making out this proposal, a fraction of this would prevent recurrence of the defects as have came to light in this case.
Your are therefore advised to take appropriate note of the aforesaid Cegat Order as also the Instructions issued by the Board from time to time in this regard for further guidance and action and ensure that such deficiency does not. occur.
Deputy Secretary (Review)