Inquiry Ordered for Tax Deduction Error by School Officials; Action Required from Education Authorities in U.P.

The HC directed an inquiry into the conduct of the District Inspector of Schools and the Finance and Accounts Officer for mistakenly deducting income tax at 30% from the petitioner's arrears, contrary to tax provisions. The Additional Chief Secretary, Secondary Education, U.P., must investigate and take appropriate action. The Director of Education (Secondary Education), U.P., was ordered to submit a personal affidavit explaining the delay in payment and why interest should not be awarded. The judgment underscores adherence to legal procedures and good faith in official duties to prevent disputes and delays.

---

---

Issues:
1. Correction of opposite party description
2. Deduction of income tax at a higher rate
3. Responsibility for income tax deduction
4. Failure to pay arrears of salary
5. Vindictive approach and incompetence of officers
6. Direction for inquiry and suitable action
7. Award of interest for delay in payment

Analysis:

Correction of opposite party description:
The learned counsel for the petitioner requested to correct the description of the opposite party to include the State of U.P. and the Director Education (Secondary) as opposite party no. 6.

Deduction of income tax at a higher rate:
The District Inspector of Schools and the Finance and Accounts Officer mistakenly deducted income tax at a rate of 30% from the arrears paid to the petitioner. They claimed it was a bonafide mistake due to misinterpretation of tax provisions.

Responsibility for income tax deduction:
The Finance and Accounts Officer clarified that she only provided suggestions, and the final decision for deduction was made by the District Inspector of Schools. Both officers stated that the deducted amount had already been paid to the income tax department and could not be refunded to the petitioner.

Failure to pay arrears of salary:
Initially, the officers declined to pay the petitioner's arrears but later made the payment after deducting income tax. This action was against the provisions of the Income Tax Act, indicating a vindictive approach and incompetence on the part of the officers.

Direction for inquiry and suitable action:
The court directed the Additional Chief Secretary, Secondary Education, U.P. to conduct an inquiry into the officers' conduct and take appropriate action based on the findings. A detailed inquiry is necessary to determine the officers' capability and motives.

Award of interest for delay in payment:
Due to the apparent deliberate harassment of the petitioner, the Director of Education (Secondary Education), U.P. was directed to file a personal affidavit explaining why interest should not be awarded for the delay in paying the arrears of salary.

This judgment highlights the importance of following legal procedures and acting in good faith while discharging official duties to avoid unnecessary disputes and delays in payments.

---