WISH YOU ALL HAPPY DIWALI. No Inspector/ Superintendent is agreed upon for removal of regional disparity prospectively. They are interested for removal of regional disparity retrospectively since 1975. Inspectors of Mumbai CCA (may be presently working as Superintendent or AC but still in service) must be treated at par with his batch officers promoted anywhere in CBEC. Grant seniority for promotion to the next grade from the date of his batch officers got promotion. If any one says how it is possible: It is possible by a line of Cabinet approval to effect that the promotions to Group a from feeder cadres based on combined total service in Inspector and Superintendent or equivalent Grades. Cabinet is empowered to frame any Rule and it can make any relaxation to maintain parity in accordance with Article 14 & 16 of Constitution of India. For cabinet approval we should meet PM & FM along with certain MPs. We are ready to take at least 35 MPs in a procession to meet PM/FM. We are quite hope full for approval of cabinet for removal of regional disparity. But our present leaders of AICEIA are not willing to accompany us. Virtually AICEIA is totally defunct. The leaders of AICEIA are responsible to delay the CR for which the CR is delayed for 8 years and thereby the regional disparity has been increased drastically. The officers of reserved categories have already prepared the grounds work to file CAT case at Chennai and Hyderabad to stay the CR at any cost. They are totally interested to make delay the CR for another five years, so that no one can get any benefit. Mumbai Superintendents has to pay for their distorted approach and for failing to act in time in the present CR-2013. The dismal activity to mobilise the cadre in this CCA and explaining the pros and cons of CR 2013 will lead to last minute blues in promotional matters. As far as Inspectors concerned a final protective action will be initiated in the few weeks to come and kindly dont pressurise for more updates regularly. Our action will serve the purpose and hope we will be successful for whom we are working. We are going to arrange one joint meeting at Mumbai in the next week to discuss about filing of a CAT case to stay the CR. Though local Associations of Inspectors and Superintendents are totally against for conducting of such joint meeting at the behest of leaders of AICEIA, but many Inspectors and Superintendents ( including office bearers) of Mumbai and out side of Mumbai have contacted us and furnished their willingness to attend such joint meeting and all of them are interested to obtain stay order for implementation of CR. Mr. S.K Patil and Mr. K.S. Pandit IRS may attend such meeting. In the mean time all Direct Recruit Inspectors (may include Superintendent / AC/DC/LDC/UDCs) please go through the draft representation placed below and submit to your Jurisdictional CCA for revision of seniority before promotion in the CR-2013. Do it immediately so that a quick action is initiated. CBDT VIDE LETTER DATED 3rd JAN 2013, appointed a TASK FORCE to revise the seniority in Income Tax. To The Chief Commissioner of Central Excise, C Ex. Zone I ( …….CCA for C. Ex. Inspector Cadre) Sir, Subject: Fixing inter-se seniority between Direct Recruit and Dept. Promotee Inspectors Hon’ble Supreme Court Order dtd. 27.11.2012 reg:- The Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in the Civil Appeal No. 7514-7515 of 2005 UOI & Ors. Vs. N.R. Parmar & Ors. delivered judgment on 27.11.2012, “on the method of fixing service seniority between Direct Recruits and Departmental Promotees in Central Govt. departments”. Copy of the judgment is enclosed for your kind information. You are requested to implement the same, independently, without waiting for any further directions from CBEC or others, as your office being the Cadre Controlling Authority has already been delegated to decide on the Inspector Cadre issues, especially on seniority/interse-seniority by CBEC. The CBDT issued a letter by forming a taskforce to decide on the same issue within the CBDT (copy enclosed), which shows a positive and proper initiative of a matter duly vetted by the Apex Court (copy enclosed). Brief background of its relation to Central Excise: Hon’ble CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi order dated 20.3.2007 in OA No. 2093/2005 in Harsh Kakar & Ors (C. Excise Delhi officers) Vs. UOI & Ors. (Copy enclosed). In the said OA the applicants had challenged the Seniority List of Inspectors circulated by the Department on the ground that the Direct Recruit Inspectors were wrongly accorded seniority in the year of their actual appointment rather than the year to which the vacancy related. The Hon’ble CAT, vide the said order, took note of the fact that the issue regarding inter se seniority of Inspectors of various grades pertaining to Ministry of Finance whether they belong to CBEC / CBDT was then pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CA No. 7514-7515/2005- UOI & Ors Vs. N.R. Parmar & Ors; and had accordingly disposed of the OA with the remarks that both sides would be governed by the judgment to be pronounced in the aforementioned case, as and when it is decided The CA No. 7514-71515 of 2005 decided vide order dated 27.11.2005 decided the the following with regard to the inter-se seniority of Direct Recruits and Promotees: I. The basic principle of ‘rotation of qutoas’ for determination of the inter-se seniority between Direct Recruits and Promotees, as laid down vide MHA OM dated 22.11.1959 prevails. This OM dated 22.11.1959 has not in any way been overruled or superseded by the subsequent OM dated 7.2.1986. II. The OM dated 7.2.1986 has only partially modified the provisions of the OM dated 22.11.1959 to cover the situation where the vacancies for Direct Recruits / Promotees earmarked for a particular recruitment year could not be filled up through the current / original examination or selection process and had, therefore, to be carried forward to the next years. Only in such peculiar situations, the earlier practice of reserving the slabs for carried forward vacancies to be filled up through later examinations has been done away with by the modification brought about by OM dated 7.2.1986. III. As long as the vacancies earmarked for a particular recruitment year are duly filled up by the original / first examination and not carried forward, the principle of rotation of quotas envisaged in OM dated 22.11.1959 would apply and the modifications brought in by the OM dated 7.2.1986 would not be applicable. IV. It is not necessary that Direct Recruits for vacancies of a particular recruitment year should join within the recruitment year (during which the vacancies had arisen) itself. As such, the date of joining would not be a relevant factor for determining the seniority of Direct Recruits. It would suffice if the action has been initiated for Direct Recruit vacancies within the recruitment year in which the vacancies had become available. Delay in administrative action cannot deprive an individual of his due seniority. V. The words “initiation for action of recruitment” and the words “initiation of recruitment process” have been interpreted to mean the date of sending the requisition to the recruiting authority. As per the parameters provided by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the aforesaid judgment, I am duly entitled to the seniority of the year 1993 in view of the following: a. I have joined the Department as Inspector of Central Excise through Staff Selection Commission (SSC) Exam of 1993; b. The advertisement for these Direct Recruit Vacancies was issued by SSC in July, 1990. (copy of my application form is enclosed as Annexure ‘C’ in which the closing date is given as 20.8.1990); c. The advertised vacancies were duly filled up through the original / first examination conducted by SSC in December, 1990 (copy of my Roll No. is enclosed as Annexure ‘D’ in which the date of exam is given as 2.12.1990); d. I have been recruited against these originally advertised vacancies and not against any carried forward vacancies; e. The fact that my selection process could not be completed in the recruitment year (1990) cannot deprive me from getting the due seniority of this year. f. The principles for determination of inter-se seniority laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforementioned case clearly justifies my claim for getting the seniority of the recruitment year 1990 for getting interspaced between the promotees of that year. In view of the above, you are requested to take immediate action in recasting the seniority lists of the relevant years in accordance with the Principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the aforesaid judgment. Yours faithfully, Encls: As above (NAME OF INSPECTOR / SUPERINTENDENT) Customs & Central Excise, Cc to: The Member (Personnel) Central Board of Excise & Customs - For ensuring the revision of seniority list in the CCA, effecting further promotions in the revised seniority especially in the forth coming CR. CBDT initiative copy is enclosed for necessary similar action.
Posted on: Sat, 02 Nov 2013 09:12:41 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015