T^ -^WIV\<i, WX\\W , ^WWV. *<IWI*Nith-^'° <9° ^/°^/WI,200 sn^ff Tra?T (yf^i't'?) LSrfyNi' wiTail^l^? f>\ K • ?^nw ^ifo an^i Division Sench; Hon'ble Shri Hon'bleShri Writ Petitiori Vsrsus 1. 2. 3. 4. <;n)<i[ci<tli ^iHflf'^ fs1^ <f^^i< ^TaiRiH 3D^i Dhirendra Mishra & R.N. CJiaodrakar^JlJ No.l45'Aof 2006 Union of India, through the Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi. Chief Commissionsr of Income Tax, Central Revenue Building, Civil Lines, Raipur (Chhattisgarh) Commissioner of Income Central Revenue Building, Lines, Raipur, Chhattisgarh. Tax Recovery Offlcer (Income Tax), Raipur (Chhattisgarh) phri Virendra Kumar Sharmar [nspector of Income Tax, 265, punder Nagar, Mahadeo Ghat Road, paipur (Chhattisgarh) .J Tax, Civil JA1 B jUnion of India, through the iecretary, Department of Revenue, f^inistry of Finance, North Block, New pelhi. IChairman, Central Board of Direct 'axes, North Block, New Delhi. phief Commissioner of Income Tax, ^ayakar Bhawan, Hoshangabad Road, Bhopal. :ommissioner of Income Tax, vwSw ^#t 9;WRRl(ra.li.?IT.T—FS/95—11/200X—1,00, 001 R3ssi "'f':! esR ",'S^^^EK"SS9fWS'SS^S:Sg^S^^'S& 'TSt ^WM^, ^W'i, F^'ii-Hy WWff%ilfSR WC200 3TAn•'w c<^yy) iin^t^ifiFihi' ^ft ^n^ffwit^ wmwtift'oiriw t- +wiM<il4 wnS ^f 'fs^t <r<!i«iii ^.ifflnaii^r |Aayakar Bhawan, Hoshangabad P.oad, Bhopal. 5. jChief Commissioner of Income Tax, :entral Revenue Buildlng, Civil Lines, laipur (Chhattisgarh) 6. pommissioner of Income Tax, pentral Revenue Buildlng, Civil Lines, P.aipur, Chhattisgarh. 7. |l\ddl. Commissi'oner of Income Tax, ^ange-II, Central Revenue Building, pvil Lines, Raipur, Chhattlsgarh. 8. ^ssistant Commissioner of Income fax, Raipur. Versus Resoondent phri Virendra Kumar Sharma, fnspector of Income Tax, 265, punder Nagar, Mahadeo Ghat Road, laipur (Chhattisgarh) 22.4.2009 Shri Bhishma Kinger, le^rned counsel for the petitioners in both the petitions. Shri Sanjay K. Agrawal, lejarned counsel for the respondent. Heard. I Writ Petitions No. 1454/2(^06 and 904/2006 are being disposed of by this common order as In t|'oth the petitions a common qusstion jnvolved for adjudication is-vi/hether the Central Administrative Tribunal at Jabalpur (Circuit Bench-Bilaspur) was justified in i expunging adverse remark in tjie Annual Confidential Report (ACR) 1 of the respondent for ths year 1|997-98 and 1998-99? :.L_^/ I re-^.TSliii^?^?: iioo. ^^^^?i;S^^^^^%S^®i@^g!^^l?S^0i^^^^^^^^i^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ %l^fx^?iJ?%^^>^^^:^^%l:^'^^^^^SSSR^;^g^^^^@^^g^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ XI-HC—78 d-^ -*11<IIC1*1, SITil'M'IS, f°<dl'MI^< - c' IMCTI a>*(|q, • • • •••^^200 S^V 'T^SR' (ij<<f^«|^lT) SII^I ^it (<-1 ^rar sfli^T'iiBWff < Khan ^nw^f^T ^d^t Shri Sanjay K. AgrawalJ respondent submits that after| Tribunal, the resppndent was Officer vide order dated ^ No.1454/2006 & Annexure R-| <»>(<!iI<n«ihT"t1W?ff^ 'fe^ Tf^R^TC "^T SffRFT '»tl^<[ learned counsel appearing for the the order of Central Administrative ^romoted on the post of Income-Tax i.11.2004 (Annexure R-4 in WP 2 in WP No.904/2006), and he has already retired from servlce^ on 31.10.2006 from the post of lcircumstances, the instant petitions Income-Tax Officer. In these have become infructuous. Shri Kinger, learned co| unsel for the petitioners, does not dispute the above facts. Howe^er, he prays for dedding the petitions on merits. 1 . Taking Into consideratic|n that the respondent has already retired from services way back on 31.10.2006 and further considering that he was granjted promotion on 8.11.2004 by the petitioners department, nothfng survives in these petitlons for adjudication. Ths question ifivolved in these petitions regarding expunging of adverse remark |in the ACR of the respondent by the petitioners for the year 19^-98 & 1998-99, is irrelevant and meaningless in the changed accordingly, dismisssd as haviil Sd/- Dhirendra Mishra Judge circumstances. The petitions are, g become infructuous. Sdl- R.N. Chandrakar judge