Facts of the Case

Dr. Sunder Rao Gude, described in the cause title as a Deputy Commissioner, Central Tax, Musheerabad GST Division, Secunderabad, filed Writ Petition No. 6625 of 2018 challenging an order dated 12 September 2016 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench, in his Original Application (O.A. No. 021/00467/2015).

The petition sought quashing of the Tribunal's order under Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution and allowance of his original application — the underlying dispute concerned the petitioner's service/seniority grievance (as an officer previously with the Central Excise/Customs cadre, now restructured as GST), against the Union of India, the erstwhile Central Board of Excise and Customs, and several named officers.

The petitioner's counsel did not appear when the matter was called for hearing on 2 August 2023, causing it to be listed again 'for dismissal'.

On the next date, 7 August 2023, again neither the petitioner nor any representative appeared.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the writ petition should be dismissed for non-prosecution given the petitioner's repeated non-appearance.

Petitioner's Arguments

  • No submissions were made — the petitioner and his counsel failed to appear on the relevant hearing dates, and no arguments on the underlying seniority/service grievance were placed before the Court.

Respondent's Arguments

  • The Deputy Solicitor General of India appeared for some respondents; respondents 7 to 10 did not appear either. No substantive counter-submissions are recorded, as the matter was disposed of on procedural default.

Court Order / Findings

  • The Division Bench observed that the petitioner appeared uninterested in prosecuting the matter, given the repeated non-appearance.
  • The writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution, with no order as to costs.
  • No findings were recorded on the merits of the underlying seniority dispute or the Tribunal's order.

Important Clarification

This order is purely procedural — it dismisses a long-pending service/seniority writ petition because the petitioner stopped pursuing it, without any examination of the merits. The fact that the petitioner happened to hold a position in the GST department is incidental to his personal identity as a party; the case itself concerns service seniority, not any question of GST law.

Sections Involved

  • Constitution of India, 1950 — Articles 14 and 16 (equality and equal opportunity in public employment), and Article 226 (writ jurisdiction), invoked in the petition.
  • Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 — governs the Central Administrative Tribunal whose order was under challenge.

Decision – In Favour of

Decided against the petitioner, Dr. Sunder Rao Gude — the writ petition was dismissed for non-prosecution, without any decision on the merits of his service-seniority claim.

Case Details

  • Court: High Court for the State of Telangana at Hyderabad
  • Case No.: Writ Petition No. 6625 of 2018
  • Coram: Justice Abhinand Kumar Shavili and Justice Anil Kumar Jukanti
  • Date of Order: 7 August 2023

Link to Download the Order

Click here to view/download the full order

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.