Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

J U D G M E N T Altamas Kabir,J.

The petitioner in the instant special leave petition was one of two petitioners who had filed writ petition No.3622 of 2005 in the High Court of Madhya Pradesh, Indore Bench, calling in question the legal propriety of an order dated 13.9.2005 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Jabalpur Bench, in O.A.No.6002/2005. The writ petitioners had approached the Tribunal for quashing of the order of transfer by which they were transferred from Indore to Nagpur. The challenge to the order of transfer was made on the ground that inter-zonal transfer was prohibited in the Department of Central Excise and Customs and hence the impugned transfer order was void and was liable to be quashed.

(S.K. Thakur) Under Secretary to the Govt. of India By virtue of said amendment it was clarified that inter-Commissionerate transfers amongst the Commissionerates having common cadre, where there was no loss of seniority, could be allowed to continue as before.
Pursuant to the promulgation of the aforesaid circulars an order, being Office Order No.1/2005 dated 31.3.1995 was issued by the Chief Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise, M.P. and Chhattisgarh States, whereby along with 55 other officers the petitioner was transferred from the Indore Commissionerate to the Nagpur Commissionerate. It is this order which was challenged by the petitioner and others before the Central Administrative Tribunal on the ground that although inter-Commissionerate transfers were permitted the same did not permit the authorities to also effect inter-zonal transfers which had been prohibited.

During the hearing of the writ petition the main submission made on behalf of the writ petitioner was that transfer from one zone to another zone was prohibited by the Department itself and the impugned transfer order being in violation of the declared policy of the Department was liable to be quashed. On the other hand, the order of the Tribunal was strongly supported by the respondents on the ground that inter-zonal transfer was permitted, inasmuch as, constitution of a zone was for the purpose of revenue and had nothing to do with transfer which is an incident of service. It was also urged on behalf of the respondents that even if the petitioners were transferred to the Nagpur zone their seniority would not be affected in any way.

Appearing for the respondents, Mr. B. Dutta, learned Additional Solicitor General, took us to the various circulars issued by the Department of Revenue in the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, which had also been referred to by Mr. Rohtagi, relating to inter- Commissionerate transfers of Grade B, C and D employees. In support of his contention that inter-zonal transfers in the Department of Customs and Central Excise were permissible, the learned Additional Solicitor General urged that services under the said Department was an all India service wherein transfer was an incident of service to which the petitioner could not legitimately object. The learned Additional Solicitor General also referred to the communication from the Central Board of Excise and Customs to the Chief Commissioner of Central Excise and the Chief Commissioner of Customs, as also Central Excise and Customs, dated 16.1.2003, whereby it was declared by the Board that all the powers being exercised by the respective Commissioners as the Cadre Controlling Authority would thenceforth be exercised by the respective Chief Commissioners. In addition to the above, the learned Additional Solicitor General referred to the directions of the Board in its communication dated 24.8.04 whereby it was indicated that pending decision on the demand for bifurcation of group B and C cadres relating to Nagpur and Indore Collectorates it had been decided that cadre control of the said two Collectorates would be distributed between the two Collectors of Nagpur zone and Indore zone. The Collector of Central Excise of the Nagpur zone was made the Cadre Controlling Authority of Group B and C employees belonging to the Ministerial cadre whereas the Collector of Central Excise, Indore, was made the Cadre Controlling Authority in respect of Group B and C officers in the executive cadres. The learned Additional Solicitor General added that of the officers posts in the different Commissionerates the post of Superintendent was a Group B post in the executive cadre and in respect of the two aforesaid Collectorates the Collector of Central Excise, Indore, became the Cadre Controlling Authority of such employees in the aforesaid Collectorates.