Otherwise the very purpose of maintaining the hierarchical judicial discipline will be lost, the Bench observed.
Reprimanding a Tax authority for not following the dictum laid down in the High Court Judgment, the Karnataka High Court has observed that the judgments of Constitutional Courts have to be discussed in detail and if the Authorities below still have to take a different view in the facts of the case, they should record their own reasons in detail for doing so.
While assailing the order passed by, before the High Court, it was urged by the assesse Assessing Authority has made a cursory reference to the judgment of Division Bench on internal page-4 of the impugned order and later on by observing that he has considered all the submissions/replies/objections filed by the dealer, he has not cared to apply the binding judgment of Division Bench. The Court found that the authority has not followed the dictum and has not even given reasons for the same.
The court observed that only when reasons are detailed by the Authorities while distinguishing the dictum, the higher Appellate Authorities or the Constitutional Courts when dealing with their orders have an opportunity to see their appropriate application of mind to the judgments delivered by the Constitutional Court.
“If that is not done, then it would be taken as utter disregard of the judgments of the Constitutional Courts and may even drag such Authorities in the realm of judicial indiscipline and consequential disciplinary action or even contempt action against them, if such casual references, not distinguishing the same with cogent reasons is found out.”, the Court observed.
Justice Vineet Kothari cautioned all Government Department that judgments of the Constitutional Courts can be altered, modified or reversed only by the superior Constitutional Courts of larger strength or hierarchy, but they are not allowed to be casually referred and forgotten or not followed for good reason to be recorded by the Authorities below the Constitutional Courts.