IMPLEMENT N R PARMAR AND UNTIL THEN RE-DESIGNATE- DEMAND

Click here for pdf format:  https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xASbzP2MAee_8sfCSLxSQGZUFT0V6n6W/view?usp=sharing 


Ref. No: CBIC/RS/28/2020 Date: 06.08.2020


To

1) The Revenue Secretary, North Block, New Delhi.

2) The Secretary, DOPT, North Block, New Delhi.

3) The Chairman, CBIC, North Block, New Delhi.


Sirs,


Sub: Implementation of N R Parmar judgment in CBIC consequent to dismissal of SLP of UOI in P. Bharathan & Ors in CBIC – reg.



Kind reference is invited to the letter of CBIC in F. No. 32022/57/2016-Ad.III.A (Pt. IV) dated 31st July 2020 on the above subject.


2. It has been clarified by the above said letter that the DOLA & ASG have advised against filling of Review Petition in the matter of P. Bharathan & Ors where SLP of the UOI was dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and that the benefits should be given to the respondents in the SLP filed by the Department.


3. In this regard, it is brought to your kind attention that this Association is Respondent No. 8 in the above said SLP and we have filed Counters, rejoinders, etc during the proceedings stating clearly that the Question of Law raised by the department in the SLP was erroneous. The Department has also filed reply to our counters. Hence the benefit of the N R Parmar judgment has to be extended to all, irrespective of their joining. Our contention has been vindicated by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by upholding the impugned Judgment of the Honble High Court of Madras.


4. Immediately on dismissal of the SLP on 25.09.2019, we had addressed a letter to the CBIC in our Ref. No.38/CBIC/2019 dated 30.09.2019 requesting for immediate implementation of the Judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in N R Parmar, to our cadre as a whole.


5. We have repeatedly brought to the notice of the Board that the prime reason for numerous litigations on All India Seniority List pertaining to the cadre of Superintendents has been the non-uniform method of implementation of rules, circulars, etc pertaining to seniority and promotion, in different zones.


6. It has come to our notice that the Board, had taken a stand that 1986 OM of the DOPT would apply to those who joined prior to 1986 also in the matter of W P No 11620 of 2004 of the Hon’ble High Court of A.P. at Hyderabad. But it is surprising how they then decided to challenge the order of the Hon’ble Tribunal at Chennai in the P. Bharathan & Ors, upto the Hon’ble Supreme Court on a question of law ‘whether 1986 OM will apply to those who joined prior to 1986’.



7. It is equally surprising as to us how the Board accepted the Order of the Hon’ble Tribunal at Mumbai in respect of Mumbai Customs (Tribunal's order dated 06.05.2014 confirmed by the High Court, Mumbai in WP No. 6784/2014 & batch vide order dt. 22.09.2014) whereby N R Parmar was implemented with retrospective effect by quashing para 5 (h) of the DOPT OM dated 04.03.2014. The Department also revised the Seniority List in Mumbai as well as in Delhi as admitted by the Petitioners in the SLP (UOI) itself. However, they have subsequently stated in the letter dated 31st July 2020 that some CCAs have implemented orders of the Courts related to quashing of para 5(h) of DOPT OM dated 04.03.2014 at their own level, without consulting with the Board, DOPT or DOLA.


8. The above shifting and contradictory stands of the Board is inexplicable. It calls for a detailed investigation as to how such suo moto decisions could be taken at CCA levels, if at all, and whether any action was taken by the Board against such CCAs.


9. In the current situation, as stated in the Board’s letter dated 31st July 2020 cited above, the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Madras in P. Bharathan has attained finality with the dismissal of the SLP of the UOI on 25.09.2019. Hence the benefit of the decision may immediately be ordered to be made available to the entire cadre represented by this Respondent and towards that the AISL of the Superintendents of Central Excise may be ordered to be re cast since the Seniority List stands quashed by the Tribunal’s Order in this case.


10. The Board has taken more than three years already on this litigation alone, which in our opinion was wholly avoidable. Further it has not yet implemented it by correcting the AISL and making the policy adopted in all zones uniform in this respect, even after almost 10 months having passed after the SLP was dismissed. The field offices are feeling the pressure of numerous vacancies in Group A level which is affecting GST work very badly.


11. Hence, until the revision of the said AISL, the vacant posts of Assistant Commissioners of Central Excise may be ordered to be operated by re-designating as ACs, all those Superintendents who have already reached the scale of 5400 PB-3 (which is the scale of ACs) by virtue of their MACP (along with those few who would be Seniors to them by their length of service in the same cadre but had not got the scale only because they were hit by MACP cap of 3 promotions alone). We have submitted detailed proposal on the above, to the CBIC in our letters with Ref. No. CBIC/18/2020 dated 01.06.2020 and CBIC/22/2020 dated 22/06/2020. Copy of the same is enclosed for ease of reference.


12. Our above proposal would not entail any extra expenditure, can give the benefit of promotion to the most stagnating officers, enables operating the 2000 and odd vacancies in the cadre of Assistant Commissioner and gives time to the Board and DGHRM to recast the AISL in terms of the Court order. There could be no question of the criterion adopted because the Officers have already reached the pay scale entitled for the Assistant Commissioners.

We sincerely hope that your good selves will give immediate and favourable orders on the above.


Yours truly,


Sd/-

(R. Manimohan)

Secretary General


Copy for information to:

1) The Member (Admn), CBIC, New Delhi.

2) The DG, DGHRM, CBIC, New Delhi.

3) The Commissioner (Co-Ordination), CBIC, New Delhi.

4) The Joint Secretary (Admn), CBIC, New Delhi.

5) The Under Secretary, Ad.III.A, CBIC, New Delhi.



(R. Manimohan)

Secretary General