"You are Treating the Judicial Staff as if they are Your Subordinates”: SC rebukes Finance Ministry for Asking DRTs to Collect Data [Read Judgement]
The court the situation as a “shocking state of affairs,” pointing out that the Ministry of Finance had treated the DRT as if it were a subordinate office, thus undermining the independence of the judiciary
Supreme Court – SC – Finance Ministry – Debts Recovery Tribunals – TAXSCAN
Supreme Court – SC – Finance Ministry – Debts Recovery Tribunals – TAXSCAN
In a recent hearing of Superwhizz Professionals Private Limited, the Supreme Court expressed strong disapproval of the Finance Ministry's directive to collect data by the Debts Recovery Tribunals ( DRT ).
The bench, led by Justices Abhay S. Oka and Augustine George Masih, criticised the Ministry for treating judicial staff as subordinates, asserting that such behaviour is unacceptable and warrants an apology from the government.
EPF & ESI Act Unveiled – Landmark Supreme Court Decisions - click here to know more
“You are treating judicial staff as if they are your subordinates. We expect an apology from the government. Such extent of collection of data is sought within 3 days. If you want data to be collected additional staff as required by DRT should be provided. This will not be tolerated. Some of them are judicial officers you are treating them as subordinates” said the bench.
The Justices emphasised that if the Ministry required specific data, it should allocate additional staff to assist the DRTs, stating that the urgency with which the Ministry demanded the data—within a mere three days—was unreasonable.
In the previous hearing, the DRT in Visakhapatnam’s order revealed that the tribunal’s staff was preoccupied with fulfilling the Finance Ministry's data requests, rather than focusing on their judicial responsibilities.
The Justices were surprised by the order, which showed that the DRT staff were spending their time gathering data for the Finance Ministry instead of helping the Presiding Officer with their judicial work. As a result, the Supreme Court asked the DRT to provide a report explaining what the Ministry wanted and what work the DRT staff were doing.
EPF & ESI Act Unveiled – Landmark Supreme Court Decisions - click here to know more
The court described the situation as a “shocking state of affairs,” pointing out that the Ministry of Finance had treated the DRT as if it were a subordinate office, thus undermining the independence of the judiciary.
Thus, the Supreme Court issued a notice to the Section Officer of the Finance Ministry, requiring their personal appearance in court to explain the Ministry's actions. The officer was directed to clarify how the DRT could be perceived as a mere department of the Central Government.
Additionally, the court also accepted a promise from the Visakhapatnam Bar Association, stating that they would not act against their resolution. The Supreme Court warned that if the Bar Association violated this again, it would be considered serious criminal contempt.
EPF & ESI Act Unveiled – Landmark Supreme Court Decisions - click here to know more
During the hearing on 21st October 2024, Justice Oka noted that the court's involvement was important because, without it, the problematic practices might have continued without any control.
The matter was listed on 22nd November 2024 tentatively.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
