(1.) The writ petitioner is the applicant in O.A.No.1008 of 2014 on the file of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench and aggrieved by the dismissal of the aforesaid original application filed by him seeking direction to the respondent to give notional promotion as Deputy Commissioner of Customs and Central Excise w.e.f. 2006 on par with his juniors with all other service and monetary benefits, the present writ petition has been filed.
(2.) The facts of the case, briefly narrated, are as follows:
(3.) Mr.K.N.Ravikumar, learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the Disciplinary Authority took almost 11 years to complete the disciplinary proceedings for no fault on the petitioner and because of pendency of disciplinary proceedings, the petitioner's promotion due was kept under sealed cover and no DPC review was conducted for all those years and even after closing/dropping the charges in the year 2011, the petitioner was not given notional promotion as well as his consequential benefits. It is further contended that the rules contemplated under Rule 19 of CCA (CCS) Rules will not be applicable to the petitioner, since his promotion was kept under sealed cover till 2011 and therefore, the question of working in the feeder category for 4 years will not be applicable to the case of the petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the authority had taken their own time to frame charges i.e., 10 years after the alleged occurrence and disciplinary proceedings took 8 years to complete and in the meantime, his juniors were given promotions as Assistant Commissioner and Deputy Commissioners and his name was excluded in the panel due to the pendency of disciplinary proceedings till his retirement and therefore, if the disciplinary proceedings had come to the conclusion at an early stage itself, then the petitioner would have got his due promotions and other benefits while he was in service and prays for setting aside the impugned order of the Tribunal.