Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1968 (PNJ)

VIKAS MIGLANI v. STATE OF HARYANA

2016-08-05

LISA GILL, S.S.SARON

body2016
ORDER : 1. Notice of CM to counsel for the non-applicant/petitioner. Mr. H.C. Arora, Advocate for the non-applicant/petitioner accepts notice. 2. On request of learned counsel for the parties, the CM is taken up for hearing. 3. CM has been filed by the applicant-State of Haryana seeking permission to make appointments to the posts of Chairman and the Members of the Haryana Tax Tribunal ('Tribunal' - for short) after consultation with Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice of this Court for the time being without prejudice to the rights of the applicant- State of Haryana. 4. The petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking quashing of the notification dated 27.05.2011 (Annexure P-10) appointing respondent No.3 as Chairman of the Tribunal, notification dated 08.06.2011 (Annexure P-12) appointing respondent No.4 as a Member of the Tribunal and the notification dated 31.05.2011 (Annexure P-11) appointing respondents No.5 and 6 as the Members of the Tribunal. 5. According to the learned counsel for the non-applicant/petitioner, the aforesaid appointments were made without advertisement or adopting any other transparent procedure so as to determine the comparative merit of other candidates. The tenure of the Chairman (respondent No.3) and the Members (respondents No.4 to 6) have since expired. However, in terms of order dated 30.03.2016, two questions which require consideration for the present were formulated i.e.- "(1) Whether the Chairman and Members of the Tribunal can be appointed as such without consultation with the High Court? (2) Whether the provisions of sub-sections (5), (6), (7) and (9) of Section 57 of the Haryana Vat Act, 2003 are unconstitutional, particularly relating to extension?" 6. Keeping in view the large number of statutory appeals that are pending before the Tribunal, the CM has been filed for enabling the applicant-State to make appointments of the Chairman and the Members of the Tribunal after consultation with the Hon'ble the Acting Chief Justice of this Court for the time being without prejudice to its right. Learned counsel appearing for the non-applicant/petitioner has no serious objection to the same. 7. Accordingly, the CM is allowed as prayed for and necessary permission is granted to the applicant-State to make appointments of the Chairman and the Members of the Tribunal after consultation with Hon'ble Acting Chief Justice of this Court for the time being without prejudice to its right and subject to the outcome of the writ petition.