Representation reg AGT-2015

	ALL INDIA CENTRAL EXCISE INSPECTOR’S ASSOCIATION, Surat Cluster Ground Floor, Room No. G-6, New Central Excise Building. (Affiliated to the Confederation of Central Government Employees &Workers) Recognized by Ministry of Finance [vide F.No.B.12017/1/2004-Ad.IV A dated 31.12.07 & 14.1.08] Email Id:-aiceiasuratbranch@gmail.com Blog : www.aiceiasuratcluster.blogspot.in/ FB ID – Aiceia surat branch Phone No. 0261-2461808 / Fax No. 0261-2461808
President  - Kishore K.Upadhyay (Ph.-9328911006)	F.No. AICEIA/Surat/1/2015-16                                  Dated : 23.06-2015 To, The Hon’ble Chief Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Vadodara Zone, Vadodara. Respected Sir, Subject : Request to rescind/revise the Establishment Order No. 31/2015             dated 19.06.2015 issued under F.No. II/03-05/CCO/2015 by the             Additional Commissioner (CCO), O/o the Chief Commissioner,             Vadodara Zone – reg.             In continuation to this office letter of even no. dated 22.06.2015 on the captioned matter, vide which anomalies occurred in the Estt. Order No. 31/2015 dated 19.06.2015 were submitted for consideration before your kind honour, we would like to submit few written representations addressed to your good office, from our member officers, who are affected and aggrieved with the said orders as detailed in Annexure ‘A’  attached to this letter. The association has had encounter with many other officers, who are aggrieved/affected with the transfer order, but do not wish to represent in writing since they are not bothered about their postings.             While forwarding the list we would like to make it clear that, we do not recommend any of these cases since, we are fully informed of the fact that transfer/postings are an administrative decision and all the decisions in such matters are left to the judicial discretion of the appropriate authorities. 2.         We would however, respectfully submit before your honour, to kindly consider the above applications and take suo-motu cognisance of the other cases, where deviation from “Transfer Policy” has occurred and kindly revise the Estt. Order No. 31/2015 dated 19.06.2015 accordingly. It is also requested to kindly respond to our request application with due positive considerations without any prejudice. It is also expected to kindly display Due list on the official website of CCO, at least two days before finalising the revised orders, so that any anomalies may be pointed out by the concerned members/association and may be brought to your kind notice. It is also requested that till such revised orders are issued, the Estt. Order No. 31/2015 dated 19.06.2015 may kindly be rescinded in public interest. 3.         It is worth-mentioning here, that during AGT-2015, while calling for willingness to work for Customs formations, anomaly had occurred, which was brought to the notice of your honour, through our letter of even no. dated 05.05.2015. Despite our such letter, the Due list was wrongly prepared, which was again strongly opposed vide our letter dated 21.05.2015, wherein we had even submitted our apprehension that some lower level staff is/are mis-constructing the facts and playing foul, and requested to identify such staff and to take suitable action against them. After our such letter, the ommissions were removed and proper transfer orders were issued for Customs formations. 4.         But in AGT-2015 of Central Excise and Service Tax, even due list was not displayed, which gives us sufficient reasons to believe malafide and foul play. While as per CBEC guidelines, as per Revenue Secretary Office Memorandum F.No. 14014/2/2013-Vig. dated 22.01.2013 and guidelines issued by CVC, “Rotation of officers between sensitive and non-sensitive assignments should be made at regular intervals. Besides facilitating exposure to all areas of work, this also prevents the possibility of officers developing any vested interest, which in turn adversely imparts objective official functioning.”             Ours is a department of revenue wing, where utmost transparency is expected at all levels. Ministerial Cadre is no exception to it. It is therefore, requested that tenure of the ministerial staff of CCO may also be reviewed and those who have completed a longer tenure at a place, should invariably be transferred/rotated in the public interest to ensure transparency. 5.         Our association would like to make it clear that we are not opposed to any transfers made in the course of an administrative exigencies or public interest and neither have we challenged the powers and discretion of the authority. What we demand is a transparent, reasoned and an explicit order, based on the Transfer Policy. Hon’ble Apex Court in Rajendra Roy vs. Union of India & Anr, 1993 (1) SCC 148, has held that apart from legal and actual malafides, deletion of certain persons from the list and picking others is based on extraneous matters by adoption of pick and choose method, which cannot stand scrutiny of law. 6.         While asserting our request to revise the transfer orders in consonance with the Transfer Policy, we would like to rely upon the judgment of the Hon’ble CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi, in O.A.No.579/2006 dated 04.05.2006 in the case of Shri T Kujur Vs. UOI and others, wherein while allowing the OA, Hon’ble Tribunal at Para 18 had held as under : “18.            Laying down guidelines is an empty formality. It is to be adhered to when such an occasion arises. Dehors the guidelines any action taken cannot be stand scrutiny of law. Though personal malafides may not be apparent or established by the applicant, yet inaction of the respondents where the policy guidelines, by passage of time, have assumed a role of a statutory rule, for want of any statutory rule under Article 309 of the Constitution of India, these guidelines have sanctity of law. Having not been followed, the transfer cannot be countenanced in law.” 7.         We would also like to rely upon the judgment of Hon’ble CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi in O.A.No.1744/2006 dated 05.10.2006, wherein it was held at Para 15 that, 15. If the transfer guidelines are to be ignored and the statutory rules are to be adhered to, then there would be an absolute discretion to be vested in the administrative authorities where in the guise of All India transfer liability, the transfers would not be regulated and controlled in any manner. Accordingly, the guidelines in the form of subordinate legislation regulate the transfer as without any limits, norms and rules and unguided principle would make a jungle raj and an absolute discretion to the administrative authorities, which is not envisaged under rule of law, as public functionaries when discharge administrative duties, their orders are to be, on discretion, on judicious, i.e., the exercise of discretion should be judicious in the circumstances. 8.         Hon’ble High Court of Delhi while affirming two decisions of Hon’ble CAT, Principal Bench, New Delhi vide a common order passed on 23.3.2005 in WP (C) No.1361-62/2005, where the Tribunal held the transfer orders illegal and in violation of the transfer policy, disposed of the petitions with direction to the respondents to consider the options exercised in accordance with law. 9.         Article 141 of the Constitution embodies the doctrine of precedents as a matter of law. In a Constitution Bench Judgment of Supreme Court in UOI Vs. Raghubir Singh (1989)2-SCC-754, Chief Justice of India, Sh. Pathak observed as under :  “The doctrine of binding precedent has the merit of promoting a constanty and consistence in judicial decisions and enables an organic development of the law, besides provides assurance to the individual as to the consequence of transactions forming part of his daily affairs. And therefore, the need for a clear and consistent enunciation of legal principle in the decision of a court. 10.       In view of the above submissions, it is respectfully submitted to your kind honour to kindly consider our representation in positive light, in view of the binding judicial precedents to avoid any administrative inconvenience and avoidable litigations, due to intervention of Hon’ble Courts in an administrative issue. 11.       With hope for justice. Thanking you in anticipation. With regards.                                                             Yours faithfully,                         (Prashant Mishra)                                 (M.S. Prabhat)             Vice-President, AICEIA, Surat    General Secretary, AICEIA, Surat Encl : As above (2 leaves). Copy to : 1. The Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Surat-I/II/Bharuch/Audit-II and Appeals-II 2. The President, AICEIA.
General Secretary – Maya Shanker Prabhat                        (Ph.-9925260545)
Vice President, Surat Waseem Ahmad (Ph-9978575997)
Vice President, Bharuch Prashant K. Mishra (Ph.-8000659375)
Joint Secretary, Surat Badram Meena (Ph.-9537565566)
Joint Secretary, Bharuch Rajeev Kumar (Ph.-8000078533)
Liaison Secretary, Manohar Kumar
Treasurer, Siddharth Tiwari
Office Secretary, Nishant Neeraj

ANNEXURE-A

LIST OF REPRESENTATIONS RECEIVED AGAINST AGT-2015 OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND SERVICE TAX, VADODARA ZONE, VADODARA.

S.No.	Name of Inspector	Comm’te	Gist of representation	Clause of Transfer Policy claimed to having been violated
1.	Sh. Bharat Kumar Sharma	Surat-I	Comm’te not changed even after completion of more than 05 years in one Commissionerate.	Para 2
2.	Sh. Hariom Meena	Surat-II	Transfer order mentions “On cost consideration”  whereas he did never request for the place, where he is transferred.	Para 5.3
3.	Sh. Mitesh T. Kothiwala	Surat-II	Transferred out before completion of 3 years in a Commissionerate, that too in Surat-I, where he has already worked for 5 years.	Para 2
4.	Sh. Rohan Arora	Surat Customs	Transferred out from the Cluster before completion of 9 years. He is also a Physically Challenged Person.	Para 2
5.	Sh. Aditya Kumar	Surat-I	Comm’te not changed even after completion of more than 04 years in one Commissionerate.	Para 2
6.	Sh. Goutam Govinda	Surat-I	Comm’te not changed even after completion of more than 04 years in one Commissionerate.	Para 2
7.	Sh. Siddhartha Tiwari	Surat-I	Comm’te not changed even after completion of more than 04 years in one Commissionerate.	Para 2
8.	Sh. Ajoy Prasad	Bharuch	Transferred out before completion of tenure of one Cluster/ Commissionerate, or even 2 years.	Para 5.3
9.	Sh. Gopal Lal	Surat-I	Comm’te not changed even after completion of more than 05 years in one Commissionerate.	Para 2
10	Sh. Hariom	Surat-I	Comm’te not changed even after completion of more than 04 years in one Commissionerate.	Para 2
11	Sh. M.S. Prabhat	Appeals-II	Comm’te not changed even after completion of tenure. Not given opportunity to work in Audit/Surat-I, having compulsory/mandatory postings despite being in the line of promotion in next couple of years, as per expected vacancy position.	Para 4.4 r/w Para 7.1
Note : There are many officers (Inspectors), who have been transferred/retained in deviation of policy, even without any on cost request or representations.

Representation regarding AGT-2015

F.No. AICEIA/Surat/1/2015-16                                 Dated : 22.06-2015

To,

The Hon’ble Chief Commissioner,

Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax,

Vadodara Zone, Vadodara.

Respected Sir,

Subject : Request to rescind/revise the Establishment Order No. 31/2015    dated 19.06.2015 issued under F.No. II/03-05/CCO/2015 by the     Additional Commissioner (CCO), O/o the Chief Commissioner,      Vadodara Zone – reg.

            Kindly refer to the captioned matter. Our letter of even no. dated 17.06.2015 (copy enclosed) on this matter may also be referred to.

2.         In this connection, we would submit that the aforesaid AGT orders have been issued in gross violation of the “Policy for Transfer/Posting/ Rotation for Group “B” Executive Officers of Vadodara Zone” and appears to be totally arbitrary, unreasonable and issued in an autocratic manner. None of the provisions of the Transfer Policy-2015 have been followed in totality,  in the said orders and appears to be based on pick and chose principle. We have reasons to believe that, with a view to totally deviate from the Policy, no due list of Inspectors for AGT-2015, was displayed on the website as per the prevalent practice in the past. Even the Board, itself displays due list of officers before issuing AGT orders. This too, has happened, despite the fact that we had submitted our apprehensions, in writing, regarding possible deviation from Transfer Policy vide our letter dated 17.06.2015. The authority appears to be working on “Favourism Policy” in place of “Transfer Policy”.

3.         A list of representations against the transfer orders, are separately bunched and being submitted to your kind honour for consideration. However, we wish to inform your honour that the following major deviations in the transfer orders are noticed :-

(i) As per policy (Para 2), the normal tenure in a Commissionerate shall be three years, but a number of Inspectors who have already completed 3 years in a Commissionerate, have not been considered for change of Commissionerate.

(ii) As per Policy (Para 4.3), earlier Commissionerate of the officers was required to be taken into account, which has not been considering in the AGT orders.

(iii) In the Transfer Policy, there is no defined tenure in CCO/CCE(TAR)/CCE(A), but as per DGHRD Guidelines, these are non-sensitive charges and hence the officers posted in such formations should have been transferred out on completion of one year, unless they are willing to work further, since normal tenure as in non-sensitive charges in Surat Cluster is one year only, as on date. But none of the officers have been transferred out/in from Appeals-II.

(iv) As per Para 7.1 of Transfer Policy, as far as possible, the offices has to serve 3 years in the Audit Commissionerate and a mandatory posting in Surat-I Commissionerate, but how can it be possible, when the officers already completed 3 years and in some cases even after completion of 5 years in one Commissionerate, have not been transferred.

(v) The schedule of transfers has been grossly ignored as laid down in Para 13 of the Policy.

4.         In view of such major deviations, we have apprehensions that the transfer orders have been issued in a hurry, without properly considering the facts regarding history of postings, without display of Due list and blind-folded signing of the transfer orders prepared at the lower levels and even without considering the government revenue realisation in the field formations.

5.         Your honour, had held a meeting with all the Associations, while forming the transfer policy, and the policy was prepared in a much adorable manner. But the transfer orders have spoiled all the expectations of transparency and fairness, owing to such transfer policy and it clearly appears that the AGT-2015 has been made in an arbitrary and unfair manner and to make it happen, unopposed, no Due list of the officers was put on the official website or circulated in any manner, despite the written request of the association. This has brought widespread disgrace to our members and we strongly condemn such transfer orders. 19^th June is a BLACK DAY in the history of Vadodara Zone for such oppressive orders have been imposed upon our members.

6.         Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in R.V. Raveendran, J. in Sanchit Bansal V. Joint Admission Board, (2012)-1-SCC-157, Para 28, held as under :

“ An action is said to be arbitrary and capricious, where a person, in particular, a person in authority does any action based on individual discretion by ignoring prescribed rules, procedure or law and the action or decision is founded on prejudice or preference rather than reason or fact.

In an earlier case of Jaisinghani Vs. Union of India [1967(2)SCR903 at 718], the Supreme Court quoting from Diecy’s “Law of the Constitution (10th Edition) has held, “… The rule of law from this point of view means that decisions should be made by the application of known principles and rules and in general such decisions should be predictable and the citizen should know where he is.”

            The view was that any governmental action should be on the basis of pre-determined rules. Discretion is not necessarily the anti-thesis of the Rule of law. Justice Mathur said, “If it is contrary to the Rule of law that discretionary authority should be given to government departments or public officers, then there is no rule in any modern state.”

            In N. Nagendra Rao & Co. versus State of A.P. (1994)6-SCC-205, it was held by the hon’ble Supreme Court that, “But with the conceptual change in statutory power being statutory duty for sake of society and the people the claim of a common man or ordinary citizen can not be thrown out merely because it was done by an officer of the state even though it was against law and negligent”.

            In Brij Mohan Lal Vs. Union of India (2012)6SCC 502, at Para 9, it has been held that :-

“Where the rule of law prevails, there can be nothing like unfettered discretion or unaccountable action.”

            In Ramlila Maidan Incident In Re. (2012)5SCC1, Para 16, Hon’ble Supreme Court has held that,

“Any action taken by a public authority which is entrusted with the statutory power has, therefore, to be tested by the application of two standards; first, the action must be within the scope of the authority conferred by law and, second, it must be reasonable. If any action, within the scope of the authority conferred by law is found to be unreasonable, it means that the procedure established under which that action is taken is itself unreasonable.”

7.         In view of the above, our association requests your honour, to kindly rescind the aforesaid AGT-2015 orders and kindly revise it after duly publishing the due list and after considering the representations arising due to these orders.

8.         As per Para Q of the Revised Transfer/Place Guidelines for Group “B” Gazetted and Non-Gazetted Executive Officers (Posted to Central Excise & Service Tax formations) issued by the DGHRD, “Chief Commissioners have the discretion to deviate from the transfer guidelines, subject to recording the reasons for deviation in file”. By prescribing so, the DGHRD has made it clear that there is no unfettered discretion given to the Hon’ble Chief Commissioner in Transfer/Posting matters and the orders or Transfer/Posting, though an Administrative one, are liable to be appealed against in the Administrative Tribunals.

8.         The Aggrieved members of our association wish to move to the Hon’ble CAT against such unjust Transfer Orders and it is therefore requested to provide the reasons behind deviation from the transfer guidelines, to our association.

9.         An opportunity to be heard in person and to bring to your kind notice, the anomalies occurred in the Transfer order, is sought from your honour.

                                                                                    Yours faithfully,

                                                                                    (M.S. Prabhat)

                                                                General Secretary, AICEIA, Surat

Copy to :

1. The Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Surat-I

2. The Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Surat-II

3. The Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Bharuch.

4. The Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Audit-II

5. The Commissioner, Central Excise, Customs and Service Tax, Appeals-II

6. The President, All India Central Excise Inspector’s Association to bring the issue in the kind notice of DGHRD, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi and the Member (P&V), CBEC, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi.

Posting of Association functionaries during AGT-2015

F.No. AICEIA/Surat/1/2015-16                              Dated : 03.06-2015

To,

The Hon’ble Chief Commissioner of Customs

Gujarat Zone, Ahmedabad

            Sub: Posting of Association functionaries during AGT-2015 – reg.

Sir,

                Kindly refer to Estt. Order No. 24/2015 dated 29.05.2015 issued under F.No. II/03-03/CCO/2015  by the JC(CCO), Vadodara Zone vide which transfer and posting in Customs Formation in the Grade of Inspectors has been ordered. In the said order at Sr. No. 23, Shri Kishore Kumar Upadhyay, Inspector has been transferred from Surat-II to Customs formation. 

2.            Your kind attention is invited towards, the Board Circular issued vide F. No. 35017/28/92-AD-III-B dt. 30.06.94 and uploaded vide Letter No. A-35017/01/2014-AD-III-B dated 29.01.2014 under the subject of “Transfer Guidelines regarding posting and transfers of group ‘B’, ‘C’ and ‘D’ in the Attached & Subordinate offices under Central Board of Excise and Customs”.

2.            It is submitted with due regards that the point No. VI of the above referred Board Circular very clearly says that the instructions contained in the DOPT OM No. 27/3/69-Esstt (B) dt. 08.04.69 regarding transfer & posting of Association functionaries should be observed strictly read with further amendments, if any. As per the said instructions of DOPT, the Association functionaries are not to be transferred outside the headquarters office/station.

3.            As per the decades long established practice also, the Association functionaries were never being transferred to outside by the cadre controlling authorities scattered as attached & subordinate offices of CBEC throughout the country. The DOPT clarification ID No. 16/18/2008-JCA Dt. 01.12.09 as well as OM No. 16/18/2008-JCA Dt. 03.09.12 also says that the existing practice should be continued in r/o of the transfer of the Association functionaries, if it is not less favourable in comparison to the DOPT guidelines on the issue.

4.            It has again been clarified/reiterated latestly by the DOPT in this regard vide F.No. 16/18/2008-JCA Dt. 17.04.13 sent to Sh. Ajit Gambhir, Director, Ad IV of CBEC that, “In such of the Government departments/offices where a different practice is being followed now, the existing practice, if not less favourable, may continue.”

5.            In view of the above, it may kindly be brought to your kind notice that Shri Kishore Kumar Upadhyay,  Inspector, who has been transferred from Surat-II to Customs formation is a key office bearer i.e. President of All India Central Excise Inspectors Association, Surat. It is therefore requested that while making detailed posting, it may kindly be ensured that Shri Kishore Kumar Upadhyay is posted at administrative/Association headquarters office/station since if he is posted outside, the staff welfare activities of the Association as well as the employee grievances redressal mechanism will be affected adversely due to the delinking of Association functionaries with the administration & staff side both.

Thanking you,

                                                                                    Yours faithfully,

                                                                                    (M.S. Prabhat)

                                                                General Secretary, AICEIA, Surat

Letter regarding anomaly in Customs list

Dated : 05.05.2015

To

The  HON’BLE Chief   Commissioner

Central  Excise. CUSTOMS AND SERVICE TAX,

VADODARA ZONE, VADODARA

(Kind Attention:- SH. VINISH CHAUDHARY, Additional Commissioner (CCO))

 Respected Sir,

 Sub:     Annual General Transfer-2015 – INTIMATION OF GROSS DISCREPANCY AND VIOLATION OF LEGAL PRINCIPLES AND CREATING AN ISSUE OF CONTEMPT OF COURT -  reg

Kind attention is invited towards Para 2 of Letter F.No-II/03-04/CCO/2015 dated 29.04.2015 (COPY ENCLOSED FOR READY REFERENCE), wherein seniority as on 01.01.2013 for Inspectors is proposed to be considered.  In this regard following points are humbly submitted for favor of kind consideration:-

1.                    Seniority of Inspectors as on 01.01.2013 does not have any legal validity & as the Department has produced a revised Seniority List in CAT, Ahmedabad AS PER hON’BLE sUPREME COURT ORDER IN CASE OF n.r.parmar and the same are not yet challanged in any other Legal forum, thereby Seniority List 01.01.2013 is legally untenable.

2.                      Once Department has produced the revised Seniority List in CAT, Ahmedabad, and if the said revised Seniority List has not been held legally untenable , and still if Department decides to go forward with Seniority List as on 01.01.2013, DOES NOT AUGER WELL ON JUDICIOUS PARAMETER FROM aDMINISTRATION AND THE DEPARTMENT.

3.                      Seniority list Circulated vide letter F.No-II/34-08/CCO/2013 dated 14.10.2014 from Additional Commissioner (CCO) Vadodara, REGARDING SENIORITY LIST OF INSPECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, IN THE COMBINED CADRE OF GUJARAT ZONE CLEARLY states that it is subject to outcome OF O A. No.120/00148/2014.CONSEQUNTLY, the said O.A was disposed off on production of Revised seniority list dated 14.10.14 which was later placed on official website.

4.                      This seniority list should also not be kept in abeyance citing that certain officers have appealed against this in the Hon’ble High Court of Gujarat. Here it is put forth that though hearing is on for many months however there is no Stay or Order.

5.                     Kind attention is invited towards Letter F.No II/03-24/CCO/2014, dated 27.01.2015, from Additional Commissioner (CCO) Vadodara, wherein Seniority of Inspectors as on 01.01.2014 has been considered in respect of Superintendent/Inspectors postings to various SEZ.

IN VIEW of FOREGOING PARAS, it TRANSPIRED THAT VADODARA BEING A CADRE CONTROLLING ZONE HAS ALREADY CONSIDERED SENIORITY AS ON 01.01.14 FOR ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS AND THEREFORE UNLESS THE DEPARTMENT HAS ANY LEGAL ORDER FOR TAKING A DIFFERENT STAND THAN the Seniority as on 01.01.2014, IT DOES NOT APPEAR JUSTIFIED AND hence THE ASSOCIATION STrONGLY PROTESTS by disagreeing to THE CONSIDERED seniority list as on 01.01.13. FURTHER, WHEN DEPARTMENT HAS SUBMITTED SENIORITY LIST AS ON 01.01.2014 BEFORE HON’BLE CAT AND PLACED THE SAME ON ITS OFFICIAL WEBSITE IN TERMS OF THE DIRECTIONS OF HON’BLE CAT, CONSIDERING SENIORITY LIST AS ON 01.01.2013 FOR AGT-2015 IS A STRAIGHT CASE OF CONTEMPT OF COURT AS WELL.

   tHEREFORE, IT IS REQUESTED THAT sENIORITY AS ON 01.01.2014, SHOULD BE CONSIDERED FOR ANNUAL General Transfer-2015  and oblige.  

                                                                                                         yours faithfully,

 (M. S. PRABHAT)     

General Secretary

Letter to CC regarding Transfer Policy, DPC and Seniority list

	ALL INDIA CENTRAL EXCISE INSPECTOR’S ASSOCIATION, Surat Cluster Ground Floor, Room No. G-6, New Central Excise Building, Surat. (Affiliated to the Confederation of Central Government Employees & Workers) Recognized by Ministry of Finance [vide F.No.B.12017/1/2004-Ad.IV A dated 31.12.07 & 14.1.08]       Email Id:-aiceiasuratbranch@gmail.com Phone No. 0261-2461808 / Fax No. 0261-2461808
President  - Kishore K. Upadhyay                           (Ph.-9328911006)		General Secretary – Maya Shanker Prabhat                                       (9925260545)
Vice President, Surat Waseem Ahmad	Vice President, Bharuch Prashant Kumar Mishra	Joint Secretary, Surat Badram Meena	Joint Secretary, Bharuch Rajeev Kumar

BY FAX

F.No. AICEIA/Surat Cluster/Misc.-I/03/2014-15                    Dated : 01.04.2015                      

To,

The Hon’ble Chief Commissioner,

Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax,

Vadodara Zone, Vadodara.

Respected Sir,

Sub: Request for conducting of DPC for the promotion from Inspector to Superintendent Grade and finalization of Seniority list of Inspectors of Vadodara Zone– reg.

          Sir, first of all we would like to thank you for the positive steps taken by your goodself for the welfare of Staff/employees, by issueing several promotion orders in the grade of Inspector from its feeder cadre.

2.       Sir, we would like to draw your kind attention towards the two very important issues relating to the welfare and career prospects of Inspector Cadre in this Zone.

(i)     The draft seniority list of Inspectors of Vadodara Zone was prepared after considering the Apex Court’s judgement in case of N.R. Parmar & Others  and  as per the directions imparted by hon’ble CAT in this regard.  The same draft Seniority List was circulated by the Additional Commissioner (CCO), Central Excise, Customs & Service Tax, Vadodara Zone, Vadodara vide Letter F. No. II/34-08/CCO/2013 dated 14.10.2014. As more than 5 months of time period is lapsed, it is requested that, the draft seniority list may kindly be finalized. Final Seniority List after required updation, as on 01.04.2015, (removing names of the promoted officers, till date), may kindly be circulated and uploaded, on the official website of Vadodara Zone.   

(ii)  As your honour may be aware that last year, many posts of Superintendent were left vacant, due to non availability of the eligible Officers. Around 135 posts of Superintendent are lying vacant due to non availability of eligible officers till Mar, 2015 (in terms of minimum qualifying service as specified in the service rules). Your honour may be aware that by April-15, a large number of Inspectors will qualify for promotion. It is, therefore, humbly requested to initiate DPC proceedings well in advance for the vacancy year 2015-16, so as to ensure availability of adequate work force in Superintendent cadre, for the smooth and proper functioning in the zone and to ensure better career prospects to the Inspectors.

In addition to above, we draw you kind attention towards our communication to your honour on the issue of “Transfer Policy” vide our letters dated 26.02.2015 and 19.03.2015, and request your goodself to kindly give us an opportunity to explain the issues and concerns of our member officers in detail. We therefore, once again request your kind honour, to grant us an appointment at Vadodara/Ahmedabad at an early date please.

           

Thanking you. With regards,

                                                                                    Yours faithfully,

-sd- 

                                          (Kishore K. Upadhyay)                         (M.S.Prabhat)

                                                             President                                         Gen. Secretary