In a strongly worded judgment, the Supreme Court of India has stepped in to correct what it called a prolonged and unfair denial of justice to former Indian Army officer and IRS officer Captain Pramod Kumar Bajaj. The Court set aside the rejection of his candidature for the post of Member (Accountant), Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), citing bias, malice, and repeated administrative obstruction by government officials.
Background of the Case
Captain Bajaj, a decorated former Army officer who was medically discharged after sustaining injuries during service, later joined the Indian Revenue Service in 1990. Over the years, he built an unblemished career and rose to the rank of Commissioner of Income Tax.
Read Also:- Kerala High Court Quashes Suicide Abetment Case, Says Angry Words Alone Don’t Prove Criminal
In 2014, he applied for the post of Member (Accountant), ITAT. A high-powered Search-cum-Selection Committee (SCSC), headed by a sitting Supreme Court judge, ranked him first on the all-India merit list.
However, despite this, his appointment was repeatedly stalled.
The reason? A series of departmental actions, vigilance inquiries, and internal objections-many of which were later found to be baseless.
Long Legal Battle and Repeated Roadblocks
From 2016 onwards, Captain Bajaj was forced into prolonged litigation:
- His appointment was withheld despite multiple court orders.
- Vigilance clearance was blocked without valid grounds.
- He was placed in an “Agreed List” of doubtful integrity, later quashed by courts.
- He was compulsorily retired just months before retirement - a decision later struck down by the Supreme Court.
The Court had earlier observed that the compulsory retirement was punitive, arbitrary, and meant to short-circuit disciplinary proceedings.
Even after all adverse orders against the government were quashed, the authorities continued delaying his appointment.
Read Also:-Delhi High Court Rejects Sameer Wankhede’s Defamation Suit Against Netflix Show ‘Ba*ds
Court’s Observation
In the present judgment, the Supreme Court took serious note of the fact that:
- The same senior officer who had earlier faced contempt proceedings initiated by Bajaj was included in the fourth Search-cum-Selection Committee.
- The officer did not recuse himself despite clear conflict of interest.
- The government failed to file any counter-affidavit despite repeated opportunities.
The bench observed:
“The petitioner has been subjected to grave injustice and rank high-handedness. The repeated obstruction of his appointment shows a pattern of mala fide action.”
The Court emphasized that justice must not only be done but must also appear to be done, and participation of a biased member vitiates the entire selection process.
Read Also:- UGC's 2026 Anti-Discrimination Rules Face Protest by Lawyers Near Allahabad High Court
Supreme Court’s Decision
The Supreme Court passed the following key directions:
- Set aside the rejection of Captain Bajaj’s candidature by the 4th SCSC
- Ordered a fresh Selection Committee meeting within four weeks
- Directed that the concerned officer must not be part of the new committee
- Imposed ₹5 lakh costs on the Union Government for deliberate delay and harassment
- Ordered the result of the fresh selection to be communicated within two weeks
The Court noted that the conduct of authorities amounted to institutional bias and abuse of power, which could not be allowed to continue.
Read Also:- Supreme Court Sets Aside Odisha Land Dispute Orders, Says Section 47 CPC Misused After Decree
Why This Judgment Matters
This ruling reinforces three crucial legal principles:
- Bias, even in appearance, invalidates selection processes
- Government authorities cannot defy court orders with impunity
- Merit cannot be defeated through administrative harassment
The judgment also sends a strong message against using disciplinary proceedings as tools of retaliation.
Case Title: Captain Pramod Kumar Bajaj v. Union of India
Case No.: Writ Petition (Civil) No. 1180 of 2025
Decision Date: 30 January 2026
