Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Anirudh Chauhan vs Union Of India Through on 1 June, 2011
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench CP No. 433/2011 OA No. 4415/2010 New Delhi this the 1st day of June, 2011 Honble Mr. George Paracken, Member (J) Honble Dr. Veena Chhotray, Member (A) 1. Anirudh Chauhan, S/o Ram Singh Chauhan, R/o AITC Nagalia Road, Thakurdwara, Moradabad-244 601 2. Atul Kumar Mishra, S/o Chandra Bhusan Mishra, R/o Plot No.844, Sanjay Gandhi Nagar, Naubasta Kanpur, Kanpur 208021 (Uttar Pradesh) 3. Dhanesh Veer Singh, S/o Radha Krishan, R/o Flat No.104, Alaknanda Tower, Sector-4, Vaishali, Ghaziabad (UP) 4. Prakash Chandra Mishra, S/o Late Kamlesh Chandra Mishra, H.No.763, Sector N-2, Aliganj, Lucknow -Applicants (By Advocate: Shri R.Pandey for Sh. M.K. Bhardwaj) -VERSUS- Union of India through: 1. Sh. Sunil Mitra, The Secretary, Department of Revenue, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi 2. Sh. S.Dutt Majaumdar, the Chairman, Central Board of Excise and Customs (CBEC), Department of Revenue, Room No.156, North Block, New Delhi-110001 3. Smt. Alka Sirohi, The Secretary, Departmental of Personnel & Training, North Block, New Delhi -Respondents (By Advocate: Shri R.N. Singh) O R D E R (Oral)
Shri Georege Paracken:
This Contempt Petition has been filed for the alleged non-implementation of the order of this Tribunal dated 03.01.2011. The relevant paras of the said order are as under:-
4. Without going into the merits of the case and taking note of the orders passed by this Tribunal on 3.12.2009 in OA No.3494/2009 and detailed guidelines issued by the DOP&T dated 4.6.2010 on the subject of allocation of zones to Inspectors (Central Excise) and also taking into account that the representations of the Applicants are pending with the Respondents on which no decision has yet been taken, the OA is disposed of at the admission stage with the directions to the Respondent No.1 and 2 to consider the representations and pass appropriate orders on the reliefs sought for by the Applicants in the present OA within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The Respondents right are protected as no notice has been issued by us to them and the order is being passed at the admission stage.
5. With the above directions, the OA is disposed of with the directions to the Registry to enclose a copy of this OA along with this order meant for the Respondents No.1 & 2.
2. When the matter was taken up for consideration today, the learned counsel for the respondents has produced a copy of the letter No.F.No.C-18013/01/2010-Ad.III B(Pt.) dated 27.5.2011 issued by the Department of Revenue, Central Board of Excise and Customs by which applicants request has been considered and they have been re-allocated to different zones. The operative part of the said order is as under:-
2. However, as per the direction of Honble CAT, PB, New Delhi vide Order dated 3.1.2011 in OA No.4415/2010, their cases for re-allocation of zone have been examined in the Board in consultation with DOP & T and also the DOP & T instructions vide their OM dated 4.6.2010 and it has been decided to re-allocate them to the following zones-
1. Shri Anirudh Chauhan (Rank No.SLD/00322) -Lucknow
2. Shri Atul Kumar Mishra (Rank No.SLD/00270) -Delhi
3. Shri Dhanesh Veer Singh (Rank No.SLD/00275) Delhi
4. Shri Prakash Chandra Mishra (Rank No.SLD/00304) -Lucknow
3. You are, therefore, requested to forward the dossiers etc. of the above said candidates working in your Zone to the respective Chief Commissioner of Central Excise (cadre controlling authority) as indicated in Para 2 above for further necessary action in the matter. Also the officers may be relieved immediately so as to enable them to join in the zones where they have been re-allocated now.
4. This issues with the approval of Chairman, CBEC.
3. In our considered view, the respondents have substantially complied with the aforesaid directions of the Tribunal. However, if the applicants are still not satisfied of the aforesaid letter passed by the respondents, they shall be at liberty to challenge the same through an appropriate proceeding.
(Dr. Veena Chhotray) (George Paracken) Member (A) Member (J) /lg/