On 17th August, 2020, Madras High Court delivered order relating to a plea under Article 226, filed by the Service Bar Association (RBA) challenging the rules concerning the appointment and the terms of service governing the President and Members of the GSTAT that is the GSTAT (Appointment and Conditions of Service of President and Members) Rules, 2019.
Brief Facts of the Case
A plea under Article 226 filed by the Service Bar Association (RBA) challenging the rules concerning the appointment and the terms of service governing the President and Members of the GSTAT that is the GSTAT (Appointment and Conditions of Service of President and Members) Rules, 2019.
The case was adjourned twice since in view of the Centre’s submission that the GST Council was yet to meet and finalize its decisions on the issues raised in the case i.e. the qualifications, tenure, and selection procedure, as well as other conditions relating to the constitution of the GSTAT.
Arguments of both the Parties
The Centre again sought for more time, urging that the matter be posted after two months.
Appearing for the Service Bar Association, Advocate Rahul Unnikrishnan re-asserted that notification being challenged in the case cannot stand the scrutiny of law in view of the Supreme Court’s verdict in Union of India v. R. Gandhi.
The division bench headed by the chief justice, A.P. Sahi held that since the matter continues to be adjourned on account of the respondent, let the matter be listed as prayed for by the learned counsel for the Union of India after two months and in the light of the above, we continue the interim order dated 03.10.2019 until further orders.
The case has been posted to be taken up next on October 28.
Libertatem.in is now on Telegram. Follow us for regular legal updates and judgment from courts. Follow us on Google News, Instagram, LinkedIn, Facebook & Twitter. You can subscribe to our Weekly Email Updates. You can also contribute stories like this and help us spread awareness for a better society. Submit Your Post Now.