Two petitions have
been filed by officers of Mumbai Zone in Hon’ble Tribunal, Mumbai Bench seeking
implementation of the directions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of N.
R. Parmar & Ors. One of the petition is for implementing the same from 1981
onwards and the second from 1986 onwards. Both the petitions are pending before
the Hon’ble Tribunal for hearing. After much hue and cry and subsequent stay
granted by the Hon’ble Tribunal in Chennai in a petition filed by the officer
of Chennai zone, the Board has vide letter 14.10.2016 has asked all the Cadre
Controlling Authorities to confirm that the Seniority of DR and Promotees are
revised in the same manner as interpreted by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case
of N. R. Parmar & Ors V/s. UOI & Ors. A report has been called for
before 30.11.2016.
Thereafter,
a commotion has been started across the country, but reality is something else
which needs a clear cut instruction from the Board categorically so that a fair
Seniority List across all the zones can be prepared as well as incorporated in
the AISL. The relevant OM is 1959 and subsequent OM is of 1986. Rota-quota
system was from 1959, which was reversed by the various decisions of the Hon’ble
Supreme Court by OM issued in 1986. Now, in CBDT and in Customs, revision of Seniority
List was carried out. We in Excise are far behind as far as promotions are
concerned, but our counterparts in CBDT and in Customs are far ahead. After their
revision, we wakeup, but are still drowsy & unclear as to how to implement the same.
Now, when mass scale promotions are expected, all have become active in this
regard.
In
Oct-2014, promotions were carried out from Group ‘B’ to Group ‘A’, where
officers of 1983 batch were covered. Now officers of 1984 batch onwards are
expecting their promotions. In all our 16 zones, the Seniority Lists is not
uniform. Neither the Associations nor the Board has shown any interest to have
a uniform Seniority List without any infirmity. In Kolkatta Zone,
officers of 1984 batch have taken advantage of Parmar judgement and in Jaipur
the officers have been granted notional promotions and Seniority have been
revised.
On
examination of the recent letter of the Board dated 14.10.2016, it is seen that
the Board has in casual manner directed the CCAs to implement the decision of
the Hon’ble Supreme Court without giving any directions as to from which year
the revisions are to be carried out and left it to the discretion of the CCAs,
which will again result in confusion and unfairness and lack of uniformity. The
Board was required to specify a year as to from which year the Seniority was to
revised so that uniformity could be maintained, but the same has not been done.
Presently, the AISL is being maintained by DGHRD and not by the Board.
Going
through the said directions, CESA Mumbai feels that the Seniority List is to be
revised from 1981 onwards (as the Direct recruitment started from SSC from 1981
onwards ) as was done by CBDT. Further, as the Board has in principle agreed to
implement the Parmar Judgement, the officers will get the benefit from the date
of Vaccancy, as shown in the advertisement, which means that the officers is
entitled for financial benefit as well as ACP/ MACP as granted to Group ‘A’
officers.
DPC
Chances of holding DPC on 25th is
bleak as there is neither any petition filed in Chennai Bench by the Administration of
Chennai (for advancing the hearing date) nor any application filed for vacation of stay. As observed by the Chennai
Court no reply from the Board is filed till date. Additional Solicitor General
(Chennai) is insisting for a reply as
well as the latest instruction on the implementation of Parmar Judgement. No
Bench is available on Saturday & Sunday. ASG is not available in Chennai on Monday
& Tuesday i.e. 24th & 25th. From 28th Oct.
onwards up to 11th Nov., 2016, the bench will be closed due to
vacation and the last week of the October, majority of the staff will be on
leave due to Diwali vacation. Further, It is also learnt that the vigilance
clearance and penalty statement in respect of eligible officers from one of the
CCAs of the North Zone has not been received by DGHRD.
*****************
What I said in group msg before my exit proved ttrue
ReplyDeleteBe cautious in GST also it may be time borrow and ensure benefit for IRS may be tactics.
ReplyDeleteThe first SSC exam was conducted in 1979 and appointments ordered in 1980 but not 1981. The vacancies pertain to the 1979 and earlier.So the cut off date should be with reference to vacancies filled by the first SSC exam.
ReplyDeleteThe first SSC exam was conducted in 1979 and appointments ordered in 1980 but not 1981. The vacancies pertain to the 1979 and earlier.So the cut off date should be with reference to vacancies filled by the first SSC exam.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe first SSC exam was conducted in 1979 and appointments ordered in 1980 but not 1981. The vacancies pertain to the 1979 and earlier.So the cut off date should be with reference to vacancies filled by the first SSC exam.
ReplyDeleteWhy there is a demand for implementation of Parmar judgment in only the cadre of Inspectors? Please remember there are many other cadres where direct recruitment through SSC was and is still being made. What about these cadres. Moreover if the Parmar judgement is applicable to CBEC and CBDT then it is also applicable in other government departments. Therefore, the DOPT Circular of 2014 should be followed which says that the judgment be implemented prospectively and not retrospectively otherwise it will create so many problems which will again put all cadres into jeopardy because each and every department and cadre of Government will demand for refixing of seniority.
ReplyDeleteWhy there is a demand for implementation of Parmar judgment in only the cadre of Inspectors? Please remember there are many other cadres where direct recruitment through SSC was and is still being made. What about these cadres. Moreover if the Parmar judgement is applicable to CBEC and CBDT then it is also applicable in other government departments. Therefore, the DOPT Circular of 2014 should be followed which says that the judgment be implemented prospectively and not retrospectively otherwise it will create so many problems which will again put all cadres into jeopardy because each and every department and cadre of Government will demand for refixing of seniority.
ReplyDeleteNo body can nullify the judgement of honble SC. Who is DoPT to issue contrary OM. Thats why till date case r being filed in CAT.
ReplyDeletePARMAR case is very clear. And dopt OM of 1986 is clear. Till date 1959 OM is effective. I think SSC recruitment is not relevant but direct recruitment whether thro' SSC or otherwise is criteria. CBEC admn relied on Mar.2014 and some places rejected legitimate claims & refered to board. Now bd is not in a position to file reply in CAT unless they implement Parmar judgement. Hence directed all CCAs to implement the judgement.
Please understand the position correctly. The 1959 OM prescribed rota quota ie in our case 3:1 between DR and Promotees.
ReplyDeleteIn CCA s like kerala, the promotees have the "bunching" system introduced wef 1983 even though it was introduced by OM in 1986 only. These mistakes are intentionally made by vested interests and need to be corrected now.
Regarding direct recruitment, it commenced with issuance of SSC notification in 1977 and the first batch of SSC direct recruits joined in 1978.