Court validates sports persons as Tax Inspectors; disputes over selection resolved; equitable appointments upheld

The Court upheld the appointment of sports persons, including badminton players and an athlete, as Income Tax Inspectors and Tax Assistants. Disputes arose over the selection and rank list, leading to disqualification of candidates for not submitting necessary documents. The Tribunal directed the appointment of the 5th rank holder due to disqualifications, considering equitable factors for certain candidates. The Court found the selection process valid, dismissed the petitions, and directed timely appointment orders, emphasizing adherence to procedures and equitable considerations.

---

---

Issues:
1. Appointment of sports persons to the post of Income Tax Inspectors.
2. Challenge to selection and rank list.
3. Disqualification of candidates due to non-submission of NOC.
4. Consideration of subsequent events by the Tribunal.
5. Equitable considerations for disqualified candidates.
6. Appointment process and pending litigations.

Analysis:

1. Appointment of Sports Persons:
Two original petitions were filed by an aggrieved individual and two by the Department regarding the appointment of sports persons, including badminton players and an athlete, to the post of Income Tax Inspectors and Tax Assistants. The eligibility of the applicants was not in dispute, and they were ranked for selection.

2. Challenge to Selection and Rank List:
A dispute arose when a rank list was published with five rank holders, where the 3rd, 4th, and 5th rank holders challenged the selection. The Tribunal considered the matter, but specific contentions were not thoroughly examined. Subsequently, two candidates were disqualified for not submitting the necessary NOC.

3. Disqualification Due to Non-Submission of NOC:
The Tribunal directed the appointment of the 5th rank holder due to disqualification of two candidates for not providing NOCs. One candidate, who had a reasonable case for not submitting the NOC due to medical reasons, was allowed consideration by the Tribunal.

4. Consideration of Subsequent Events:
The Tribunal directed the Department to consider granting relaxation to the disqualified candidate who was on medical leave during the application period. Another disqualified candidate approached the Tribunal seeking similar consideration but was declined due to late filing and non-disclosure of employment details.

5. Equitable Considerations for Disqualified Candidates:
The disqualified candidates faced issues with the submission of NOCs from their employers. One candidate produced an NOC from a Senior Officer, which was deemed insufficient. The Tribunal emphasized the importance of disclosing employment details and submitting NOCs as per the notification requirements.

6. Appointment Process and Pending Litigations:
The Court found no infirmity in the selection process and declined the Department's request for a fresh selection. The appointment of candidates to the available posts was determined, with one candidate being directed for appointment and the other's case left for the Department's consideration. The Court directed the issuance of appointment orders within specified timelines.

In conclusion, the original petitions were dismissed, and the parties were left to bear their respective costs, emphasizing adherence to procedural requirements and equitable considerations in the appointment process.

---