Central Administrative Tribunal - Gauhati
Sri Chandan Singh And Ors vs Central Excise And Customs on 15 March, 2024
1
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
GUWAHATI BENCH
Original Application No. 040/0296/2017
Date of order: This, the 15th day of March, 2024
HON'BLE SMT. URMITA DATTA SEN, JUDICIAL MEMBER
HON'BLE DR. SUMEET JERATH, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER
Between
1. Sri Chandan Singh, Inspector
S/o Sri Shalandra Singh,
Office of the Asst. Commissioner,
Custom Division, Dhubri,
Pin - 783301, Assam.
2. Sri Pratap Kumar Sah, Inspector
S/o Sri Vishwanath Sah,
Office of the Comissioner,
Central Goods & Service Tax,
Milan Nagar, Lane No. F
C.R. Building, Dibrugarh,
Pin - 786003, Assam.
3. Sri Sandeep Kumar, Ispector
S/o Shri Shrawan Kumar,
Office of the Superintendent
Goods and Services Tax
Byrnihat, Range-III, Byrnihat
Pin - 793101, Dist.- Re- Bhoi, Meghalaya.
.....Applicants
-V/s-
1. The Union of India,
Represented by the Secretary to the
Government of India, Revenue Department,
O.A. No. 040/296/2017
2
Ministry of Finance, New Delhi - 110001.
2. Central Board of Excise and Customs,
Represented by its Secretary,
Ministry of Finance, New Delhi - 110001.
3. Shri Rajpal Singh,
Under Secretary (Ad. III B),
Central Board of Excise & Customs,
Dept. of Revenue, Ministry of Finance,
HUDCO Vishala Building, Bhikaji Cama Place,
New Delhi - 110066.
....... Respondents
Advocate for applicant: Sri M. Chanda
Advocate for respondents: Sri S.K. Ghosh, Addl. CGSC
Date of Hearing: 08.03.2024 Date of Order: 15.03.2024
ORDER
PER DR. SUMEET JERATH, MEMBER (A):
It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the applicants that since the issue involved in this case is identical one, therefore, applicants' prayer to join together in a single application may be allowed; and is, therefore, allowed.
2. The instant O.A. has been filed by Shri Chandan Singh and others seeking the following relief(s):-
O.A. No. 040/296/2017 3 "8.1 To set aside and quash the impugned Letter dtd. 17.01.2017(Annexure-A/3). 8.2 To direct the respondents to review the existing allocation of Zone of the present applicants given by impugned Letter dtd. 17.01.2017(Annexure-A/6) with a further direction to re-allocate the Zones strictly in terms of principles of Merit cum Preference, without loosing of their seniority in the cadre of Inspector in the light of DoP&T draft O.M. dated 04.06.2010 and also in light of the earlier order dtd. 06.04.2016 issued by the CBEC.
8.3 To direct the Respondents to re-allocate the present applicants either at Kolkata Central Excise Zone or in any other Zone, strictly in terms of their options/preferences given by the individual applicants strictly on the principle of "Merit Cum Preference" on the basis of result of Combined Graduate Level Examination, 2015 without loosing of their seniority in the cadre of Inspector.
8.4 Costs of the application. 8.5 Any other relief(s) to which the applicant is entitled as the Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper.
3. The factual matrix of the case is that Applicant No. 1 - Shri Chandan Singh; Applicant No. 2 - Shri Pratap Kumar Sah and Applicant No. 3 - Shri Sandeep Kumar are working as Inspectors in different offices under the Central Excise Zone, NER Shillong. All the three are OBC candidates and had successfully passed the Staff Selection Commission Combined Graduate Level Examination, 2015 for the post of Inspector (Central Excise) under Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC). Their names figured at Serial No. 935, 936 and 937 with the rank of 2664, 2665 and 2666 on merit basis respectively.
O.A. No. 040/296/2017 4 Later, under the principle of 'Merit cum Preference' in terms of CBEC's Letter No. F. No. A - 12034/SSC/03/2015 - Ad. III B dated 23.08.2016, the Respondent Authorities invited options/preferences for posting from all the successful Applicants who had cleared this examination including the three Applicants who have filed the instant O.A. In response to this letter, Applicant No. 1 - Shri Chandan Singh (Serial No. 935, merit rank - 2664) submitted the following list of preferences:-
Option/Preference Name of the Cadre Code of Cadre No. Controlling Authority Controlling Authority (1) (2) (3) 1st Ranchi Central Excise N 2nd Kolkata Central Excise J Bhubaneswar Central 3rd C Excise 4th Lucknow Central Excise K 5th Bhopal Central Excise B 6th Delhi Central Excise G Hyderabad Central 7th I Excise 8th Vadodra Central Excise P 9th Shillong Central Excise O 10th Chennai Central Excise E 11th Bangalore Central Excise A 12th Goa Central Excise H Chandigarh Central 13th D Excise 14th Mumbai Central Excise L 15th Cochin Central Excise F O.A. No. 040/296/2017 5 Applicant No. 2, Shri Pratap Kumar Sah (Serial No. 936, merit rank - 2665) submitted the following list of preferences:-
Option/Preference Name of the Cadre Code of Cadre No. Controlling Controlling Authority Authority (1) (2) (3) 1st Ranchi Central Excise N 2nd Kolkata Central Excise J 3rd Lucknow Central Excise K 4th Bhopal Central Excise B 5th Delhi Central Excise G Chandigarh Central 6th D Excise 7th Vadodra Central Excise P 8th Mumbai Central Excise L 9th Goa Central Excise H 10th Shillong Central Excise O Bhubaneswar Central 11th C Excise Hyderabad Central 12th I Excise 13th Chennai Central Excise E Bangalore Central 14th A Excise 15th Cochin Central Excise F Applicant No. 3, Shri Sandeep Kumar (Serial No. 937, merit rank
- 2666) furnished the following list of preferences:-
Option/Preference Name of the Cadre Code of Cadre No. Controlling Authority Controlling Authority (1) (2) (3) 1st Kolkata Central Excise J 2nd Bhopal Central Excise B 3rd Vadodra Central Excise P 4th Lucknow Central Excise K 5th Ranchi Central Excise N 6th Hyderabad Central I O.A. No. 040/296/2017 6 Excise Bhubaneswar Central 7th C Excise 8th Bangalore Central Excise A 9th Delhi Central Excise G 10th Mumbai Central Excise L 11th Goa Central Excise H 12th Shillong Central Excise O Chandigarh Central 13th D Excise 14th Cochin Central Excise F 15th Chennai Central Excise E
4. However, surprisingly, in total violation of the 'Merit cum Preference' principle based on extraneous consideration and in an arbitrary manner, all the three Applicants were allocated Shillong Central Excise Zone, though, the three had given preference for Kolkata Zone as first or second preference and Shillong Zone was placed at 9th, 10th and 12th preference respectively. On the other hand, to the utter shock and dismay of the three meritorious OBC Applicants, as many as fourteen OBC Applicants who were less meritorious than them (Ranks - 2668, 2669, 2670, 2673, 2675, 2676, 2681, 2682, 2684, 2686, 2687, 2688, 2690 and 2692) were allocated Kolkata/Bhubaneswar Zone as is evident from the table below:-
O.A. No. 040/296/2017 7 LIST - 1 (Candidates selected under same category, allocated in Kolkata CEx Zone and Bhubaneswar CEx Zone, after the ranks of applicants) SL. No. NAME RANK PLACE(CEx. Zone)
1) 939 NAVIN KUMAR 2668 KOLKATA
2) 940 PANKAJ KUMAR 2669 KOLKATA
3) 941 SUMIT KUMAR 2670 BHUBANESWAR
4) 942 KISHOR KUMAR 2673 BHUBANESWAR MANOJ 2675 KOLKATA
5) 944 CHOUDHARY AISHWARYA 2676 KOLKATA
6) 945 JAISWAL
7) 946 ANAND PRAKASH 2681 KOLKATA SANKET 2682 KOLKATA
8) 947 SHIVHARE
9) 948 ANKIT 2684 KOLKATA ABHISHEK 2686 KOLKATA
10) 949 KUMAR JAISWAL
11) 950 DEVANSH SAHU 2687 KOLKATA HEMANT KUMAR 2688 KOLKATA
12) 951 TANWAR RAKESH KUMAR 2690 KOLKATA
13) 953 SAINI ROUSHAN 2692 KOLKATA
14) 954 KUMAR SINGH
5. Thus, while 12 meritorious OBC candidates were given Kolkata; 2 less meritorious OBC candidates were given Bhubaneswar. This zone allocation list was published on the CBEC website on 17.01.2017. The three Applicants made a representation against this but their representation was rejected with a direction not to entertain any further correspondence in the matter of allocation of zone. The three Applicants, therefore, grudgingly pursuant to the Offer of Appointment Letter dated O.A. No. 040/296/2017 8 28.02.2017 and on completion of their required formalities joined in their respective places of posting under the Shillong Zone in the State of Assam and Meghalaya in the month of March - April, 2017. Now, given their dissatisfaction nay resentment on not getting their choice zone, the three Applicants have filed the instant O.A.
6. Sri M. Chanda, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the Applicants forcefully argued that the Respondent No. 3 - Shri Rajpal Singh, Under Secretary, (Ad. III B), CBEC, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance is the villain of this piece. He through his malicious mensrea and malafide motives had manipulated the allocation of zones to the successful candidates. He mischievously accommodated 14 numbers of less meritorious OBC Inspectors at Kolkata and Bhubaneswar Zones of Central Excise to the detriment of the 3 number of more meritorious OBC Applicants who were prejudiced and discriminated against and allotted Shillong Zone(which was quite below in their preference list).
7. Sri S.K. Ghosh, learned Addl. CGSC for the Respondents vehemently argued that no wrong was committed O.A. No. 040/296/2017 9 by the Respondent Authorities - that the 14 OBC candidates who were allocated Kolkata/Bhubaneswar Zones were deserving candidates in the OBC category/vertical. The 3 OBC Applicants in the instant O.A. were adjusted against the 'General Category' candidates vacancies which were not filled up in the first round and later filled in the second round by these 3 OBC Applicants. He further invoked the Doctrines of (i) Stare Decisis - Don't unsettle the settled and (ii) Estoppel - now that the allocation of Zones has been done in 2017 amongst the various Inspectors, any tampering and effecting changes would upset the whole apple cart.
8. However, this was countered by the Counsel for the Applicants who averred that Estoppel does not apply here as appeal was made by the Applicants immediately and the instant O.A. too was filed immediately thereafter when their appeal was rejected. Also, when an injustice and a wrong has been done, it needs to be corrected to meet the ends of justice, equity and fair play and in this case uphold the sacred principle of 'Merit cum Preference.' O.A. No. 040/296/2017 10
9. Heard the learned counsel of both the sides and perused the relevant documents on record. We fail to understand as to how the less meritorious OBC candidates - in this case 14 number were given Kolkata and Bhubaneswar Zones when more meritorious candidates - the 3 OBC candidates who had a merit position of 2664, 2665 and 2666 in the merit list and were ahead of the said 14 OBC candidates got deprived of their choice postings. This is completely arbitrary, whimsical and capricious nay an obnoxious travesty of Justice.
10. In the light of the above, we are of the firm conviction that there has been serious miscarriage of justice depriving the three OBC candidates with higher merit position of their respective choice postings. We, therefore, direct the Respondents to respect the choices given by the three Applicants and adjust them in Kolkata/Ranchi Central Excise Zone on the principle of 'Merit cum Preference' within a period of Three(03) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this Order.
O.A. No. 040/296/2017 11
11. With the above directions and orders, the instant O.A. is disposed of with no order as to costs.
(DR. SUMEET JERATH) (URMITA DATTA SEN)
MEMBER (A) MEMBER (J)
/Sk/
O.A. No. 040/296/2017