Shimla, May 6,
The Himachal Pradesh High Court has dismissed a petition filed by retired Indian Administrative Service (IAS) officer Amit Kashyap, who challenged the state government’s relaxation of eligibility criteria for the appointment of a Technical Member (State) to the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT). A Division Bench comprising Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan and Justice Sushil Kukreja ruled that the state’s decision, endorsed by the GST Council, was valid and made through proper legal procedures.
Take Free HimachalScape Subscription Complete this form
Choose Your Membership
The court was hearing a petition challenging the state’s notification dated October 19, 2024, and a subsequent corrigendum issued on November 21, 2024. These notifications expanded eligibility for the post to include Class-I Gazetted Officers from the State Tax and Excise Department with 25 years of service, in deviation from the earlier norm that restricted the post to Group ‘A’ officers with the same tenure, as stipulated under Section 110(1)(d) of the Central Goods and Services Tax (CGST) Act, 2017.
Kashyap, who himself had served more than 25 years in Group ‘A’ and held key positions in finance and taxation, argued that the move was arbitrary and ultra vires the provisions of the CGST Act. He contended that since officers with the required Group ‘A’ experience were available, including himself, the relaxation was unjustified and discriminatory.
However, the State government and GST Council, represented through their legal counsels, defended the relaxation by citing a shortage of qualified Group ‘A’ officers within the State Tax and Excise Department. They asserted that the amendment aimed to ensure effective functioning of the GSTAT and adequate representation from within the state’s own cadre. According to their submission, officers with 25 years of service as Class-I Gazetted Officers in the department possessed the necessary experience and institutional knowledge to serve the role effectively.
The court found merit in the justification offered by the state and the GST Council. It held that the GST Council had duly considered and approved the proposal after following due process. The Bench emphasized that the petitioner had failed to demonstrate that the decision was either unauthorized or in violation of the CGST Act.
Importantly, the court observed that as a member of the All India Services, Kashyap could not assert an exclusive claim over a post that was deliberately designed to benefit officers within the state department, particularly when the intent was to ensure a balance of representation and operational efficiency.
Terming the petition “devoid of merit” and based on “misconceived grounds,” the court dismissed the case, thereby affirming the state government’s authority to relax eligibility conditions when justified by administrative exigency and with the endorsement of the GST Council.
