Surender Singh & Others vs Union Of India & Others

R.N. Singh, Member (J)

We have heard learned counsels for the parties.

The present OA has been filed by the applicants, 26 in numbers, praying therein, for the following reliefs:-

"A. To declare the action of the respondent in not promoting the applicants to the post of Superintendent Central Excise alongwith similarly placed persons who have been promoted w.e.f. 01.04.2018 vide order dated 16.03.2018 as illegal and direct the respondents to promote the applicants also to the aforesaid post of Superintendent Central Excise as per their eligibility before 1st of April 2018 by holding supplementary DPC and grant all consequential benefits.

B. To declare the action of the respondents in not preparing zone of consideration for promotion to the post of Superintendent Central Excise out of eligible officers in feeder category as per RRs as illegal and direct the respondents to prepare the zone of consideration for promotion to the aforesaid post of Superintendent Central Excise amongst eligible officers (including applicants) having the eligible service as per rules and DOP&T instructions and consider their claim for promotion to the post of Superintendent Central Excise w.e.f 1st April 2018 with all consequential benefits.

C. To set-aside the order dated 16.03.2018 to the extent the applicants have not been promoted to the post of Superintendent Central Excise w.e.f. 01.04.2018 and grant consequential relief to the applicants by directing their promotion to the post of Superintendent Central Excise with all consequential benefits.

D. Pass any such other or further order or direction as this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of this case."

After completion of pleadings, the applicants have filed MA No.1352/2020, praying therein, to place on record certain relevant documents and the same was allowed vide Order dated 20.08.2020.

Respondents were accorded opportunity to file additional affidavit(s), if any, in view of certain new documents brought by the applicants on record vide MA No.1352/2020. However, in spite of opportunities, respondents have chosen not to file any additional affidavit. The Ld. Counsel for respondents have not disputed the genuineness of the said documents, brought on record by the applicants.

Learned counsel for the applicants, Mr. Ajesh Luthra, submits that during the pendency of the OA, the Competent Authority, i.e., Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs vide their letter dated 26.05.2020 (Annexure A/14) has considered the grievances of the applicants with regard to Zone of consideration for promotion to the post of Superintendent, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) and the said letter dated 26.05.2020 reads as under:-

"Please refer to your letter C.No.II-3(16)CCA/Boards' letter20202470 dated 11.03.2020 on the above subject.

The matter has been examined. The instant issue relates to preparation of consideration zone. The short question here is as to whether the zone of consideration would be prepared from the seniority list or from the list of eligible officers in the DPCs held for year 2018-19 and year 2019. It appears that the relevant RRs of the Superintendent provided for residency period of 8 years in the feeder grade of Inspector as the eligibility criteria for consideration of promotion to the post of Superintendent. Therefore, the Zone of consideration should have been prepared by including the officers with the requisite length of service of 8 years for the DPC conducted in March, 2018 and requisite length of service of 8 years (relaxable upto 2 years in cases where juniors are being considered for promotions, the senior with length of service 6 years would also be considered for the DPC conducted inDecember, 2018. However, from the representations and the reply submitted by your office, it is observed that the zone of consideration has been prepared from the seniority list by including the officers who did not have requisite length of service of 8 years (6years, if relaxable) which has resulted into exhausting of consideration zone thereby leaving out certain eligible candidates from the list of consideration zone.

Further, your office has also informed in your reply that the matter is sub-judice before Hon'ble CAT in Surender Singh and others Vs. UOI and Ors. And also, there is stay on conduct of DPC in another case titles Anand Singh and Ors. Vs. UOI and Ors.

In view of the above, it is requested to initiate remedial measure to ameliorate the grievance of the officers who would have figured in the consideration zone, had the same been prepared correctly under intimation to the Board."

Learned counsel for the applicants submits that the Competent Authority has considered the pendency of the instant OA, i.e., Surender Singh & others vs. Union of India and ors. and also another case titled Anand Singh vs. Union of India and Ors. He submits that the case of the applicants in the present OA are the subject matter of DPC of the years 2018 and 2019 whereas the case of Anand Singh (supra) DPC pertains to the year 2020. Therefore, there is no stay operating in the matter of zone of consideration of the present applicants for the years 2018 and 2019.

Sh. Ajesh Luthra, learned counsel for the applicants further submits that in spite of clear cut directions of the Competent Authority, i.e., Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 vide their aforesaid letter dated 26.05.2020, under reference, no action redressing the grievances of the applicants has been taken by the remaining respondents in the matter of promotion of the applicants from the post of Inspector to the post of Superintendent, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC) till date.

Learned counsel for the applicants further submits that the present OA may be disposed of with the directions to the respondents to ensure the compliance of the order dated 26.05.2020 of the respondent nos.1 and 2, under reference, in a time bound manner.

Learned counsel for the respondents, Sh. Gyanendra Singh, vehemently opposed the request made on behalf of the applicants. He invited our attention to letter dated 11.03.2020 of Joint Commissioner, Office of the Principal Chief Commissioner of Central GST, Delhi Zone, addressed to the Commissionerate, Central Board of Indirect Taxes and Customs (CBIC), Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, Government of India and submits that in view of such letter, request of the applicants could not be acceded to. He further submits that the OA should be disposed of on the basis of the pleadings and not on the basis of certain documents referred to by the learned counsel for the applicants.

We have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties and we find that letter dated 11.03.2020 referred to by Shri Gyanendra Singh, learned counsel for the respondents, has already been considered by Respondent Nos. 1 and 2 in their said letter dated 26.05.2020, under reference.

Furthermore, the learned counsel for the applicants has invited our attention to the aforesaid letter dated 26.05.2020 and submits that the same can be considered inasmuch as the same was brought on record by way of filing MA No.1352/2020, which was allowed vide Order dated 20.08.2020 by this Tribunal and thus become part and parcel of the pleadings on records. Respondents were granted adequate opportunity to file additional affidavit, if any, in view of the said document(s) being brought on record. Respondents have not chosen to file any additional affidavit in spite of adequate opportunity accorded to them. Moreover, learned counsel for the respondents does not dispute the genuineness of the document/letter dated 26.05.2020 and other documents brought by the applicants on record.

In view of the aforesaid, the present OA is disposed of with direction to the respondents to consider the claim of the applicants in view of their own letter dated 26.05.2020, under reference, in accordance with relevant Rules and instructions on the subject, as expeditiously as possible and in any case, within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this order.

OA is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

Pending MA(s) also stands disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.