D S GAUDE Vs. COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned Counsel for the respective parties. Mr. Sonak who appears for the Petitioners took us through the prayers made in the present Petition. These prayers are amended with the leave of this Court. We have reproduced all these prayers herein below :

(2.) THIS Petition appears to have been filed on 8th April, 2003 by 21 Petitioners. Shri A. Kamat, learned Additional Government Advocate makes a list of the Petitioners who have been benefited of the promotion in view of the Rules concerned. It is marked 'X' for identification and taken on record. The photo copy of the same has been served to the Advocates for the respective parties. Learned Additional Government Advocate on the basis of this document i.e. letter 'X' list of the Petitioners who have been allegedly promoted during the pendency of he Writ Petition, submitted, that around 18 Petitioners have been promoted as Excise Inspectors. Petitioner Nos. 19 and 20 have been promoted as Upper Division Clerks and the Petitioner No.21, has been promoted as Head Clerk. These promotions according to the learned Additional Government Advocate are in accordance with the Rules concerned i.e. Rules of 2001 i.e. Government of Goa, Office of Commissioner of Excise, Group 'C', Non-Ministerial, Non-Gazetted posts, Recruitment Rules, 1992 ( hereinafter referred to as the Rules 1992 for short ). The submission of the learned Additional Government Advocate, is not seriously opposed by the learned Counsel Shri Sonak on behalf of the Petitioners.

(3.) IT is further contended on behalf of the Petitioners that the Rules concerned does not permit such promotion, in favour of person holding the post as Head Clerk as that of the Excise Inspector. In support of his submission, the learned Counsel Shri Sonak took us through page 73 i.e. the copy of the Government Gazette at Exhibit D. The reverse side of page 73 has been pointed out to us. The point is not in dispute that at the relevant time there were 33 posts of Excise Inspectors i.e. somewhere in the year 1992. Our attention has been drawn to Column No.7 i.e. the Educational and other qualifications required for direct recruits. Shri Sonak submits that he is not concerned with the direct recruitment and therefore he straight away points out column no.11 of these Rules. According to him, so far as promotion to the post of Excise Inspector is concerned, the ratio has been given in this column no.11. We have seen the details of the ratio which reflects in column no.11.