VIJAY KUMAR Vs. UNION OF INDIA THROUGH ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, MINISTRY OF FINANCE CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant has filed the present OA, thereby praying for the following reliefs: i) Call for the records and quash and set aside the actions and omissions of the respondents in treating the applicant as a general category instead of Scheduled Caste category excluding him from eligibility list of the Inspectors and thus denying the applicant his due promotion from the post of Inspector to the post of Superintendent, Central Excise against a vacant roster point meant for SC w.e.f. from the due date after the applicant became eligible and available and sufficient number of vacant roster points were available. ii) Direct the respondents to conduct a review DPC and promote him to the post of Superintendent treating the applicant as a Scheduled Caste candidate w.e.f. the due date from the year 2003 when the applicant became eligible and available to be considered for promotion from the post of Inspector to the post of Superintendent, Central Excise, on a due vacant roster point meant for Scheduled Castes calculating separate zone of consideration and following the law declared by this Honble Tribunal in the case of Ghaziram Meena vs. Union of India dated 11/11/03 in O.A.No.2475/2002 and implementing the rules of reservation and grant to the applicant all consequential benefits including back wages. iii) Award the cost of the application in favour of the applicant. vi) Press such other order or orders as this Honble Tribunal may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.

(2.) BRIEFLY stated, facts of the case are that the applicant, who belongs to scheduled caste category, joined as Inspector, Central Excise on 1.6.1995 in the erstwhile Meerut Commissionerate. The applicant sought inter -commissionerate transfer from Noida Commissionerate to Delhi Commissionerate and accordingly he was transferred to Delhi Commissionerate vide order dated 10.4.2003. The case further projected by the applicant is that pursuant to the said order dated 10.4.2003 he joined Delhi Commissionerate on 18.4.2003. Since the applicant has joined Delhi Commissionerate only in 2003 on his own request from new seniority unit, he was not considered for promotion in the year 2003 whereby certain persons were promoted to the post of Superintendent. Thereafter, the respondents conducted several Departmental Promotion Committees(s) (DPCs) and lastly in the year 2010 but the applicant was not granted promotion, as he did not fall within the zone of consideration. This is clear from the letter dated 1.12.2010, which is the reply given to the applicant with reference to his letter dated 29.10.2010 seeking information under the Right to Information Act, 2005 (pages 54 -55 of the paper book).

(3.) FROM the material placed on record, it is also evident that the applicant for the first time has made representation dated 13.10.2010 (Annexure -V) making grievances regarding promotion of 31 Inspectors to the grade of Superintendent vide order No.192/2010 dated 30.9.2010 followed by reminders. It is on the basis of these facts the applicant has filed the present OA, thereby praying for the aforesaid reliefs.