Madras High Court Judge Asks Registry To Deduct 'Professional Tax' From HC Staff Salary

These observations came after General Secretary of Federation of Anti Corruption Teams India, Mr. C Selvaraj sent a complaint to Justice Subramaniam informing him that the staff and judges of the Madras High Court were not paying professional tax for several years even though proper Acts and Rules were in force.

On enquiry, it was revealed that the Madras High Court Staff Association had filed a writ petition in the High Court way back in 1998 challenging the provisions of the Tamil Nadu Tax on Professions, Trades, Callings and Employment Act 1992. In 2013, by way of an interim order, the court had directed the Government to consider the case of the petitioners with respect to levying tax of Government Servants by treating them as professionals. The case has been continuing adjourned since then and no other interim order exists as on date.

Justice Subramaniam also noticed that all other Government Servants in the State of Tamil Nadu were paying the professional tax including staff of Subordinate Judiciary and the Secretariat staff. It was only the High Court staff that were not making payment towards professional tax claiming pendency of the writ petition. The judge also raised suspicion over the manner in which the matter had been kept pending for all these years and opined that the staff was manipulating the case bundles in the matter of listing.

It is very unfortunate that the Madras High Court and Madurai Bench of Madras High Court Officers Staff Association taking undue advantage of the pendency of the above said writ petition and evading payment of professional tax for several years, resulting huge financial loss to the State exchequer. It is further unfortunate that the writ petition of the year 1998 is kept pending for the last 24 years without any acceptable reason, Justice Subramaniam observed.

Justice Subramaniam also observed that the Pay and Accounts Office was unduly pressurised by the staff to clear the bills without deducting the profession tax, despite the fact that they were bound to do so under the acts and rules. Such conduct had to be enquired into and due action had to be taken against them.