Big disappointment for CX Supdts - No Contempt against RS and CBEC Chairman - No retro effect for Promo formula
TIOL-DDT 2067
IN the much-stagnated lower executive cadres of Inspectors and Superintendents of Central Excise, there are lots of anomalies and imbalances. Every day we get mails from frustrated officers who have not got a second promotion in 35 years of service. A 1992 Inspector is still an Inspector - a 1992 Superintendent is
still a Superintendent. Central Excise officers complain that appraisers junior to them by 25 years have become their bosses. There are cases pending at all possible levels of litigation from Tribunal to Supreme Court. The bone of contention is the ratio among the three feeder cadres - Superintendents of Central Excise, Superintendents of Customs and appraisers of Customs. The ratio was 6:2:1 and this was not appreciated by all the feeder cadres. Twelve years ago, the Supreme Court in All India Federation of Central Excise vs. Union of India had held that the Supreme Court was not the forum to change the formula and any one aggrieved with the quota should convince the Government about the need to change the rules.
In August 2011, the Supreme Court directed the Government to alter the ratio after hearing representations from the Staff Associations and to give promotions accordingly (2011-TIOL-74-SC-MISC). Somehow the Court directions came to be interpreted as if the new formula had to be given retrospective effect. On this assumption, certain associations/officers filed contempt petitions in the Supreme Court against the then Revenue Secretary Gujral and CBEC Chairman Goel. The CBEC had changed the ratio to 13:1:2, but with prospective effect.
The Supreme Court last week dismissed the contempt petitions against both and clarified that its earlier order had no direction to apply the quota retrospectively. So, now the new ratio is applicable only prospectively.
TIOL-DDT 2067
IN the much-stagnated lower executive cadres of Inspectors and Superintendents of Central Excise, there are lots of anomalies and imbalances. Every day we get mails from frustrated officers who have not got a second promotion in 35 years of service. A 1992 Inspector is still an Inspector - a 1992 Superintendent is
still a Superintendent. Central Excise officers complain that appraisers junior to them by 25 years have become their bosses. There are cases pending at all possible levels of litigation from Tribunal to Supreme Court. The bone of contention is the ratio among the three feeder cadres - Superintendents of Central Excise, Superintendents of Customs and appraisers of Customs. The ratio was 6:2:1 and this was not appreciated by all the feeder cadres. Twelve years ago, the Supreme Court in All India Federation of Central Excise vs. Union of India had held that the Supreme Court was not the forum to change the formula and any one aggrieved with the quota should convince the Government about the need to change the rules.
In August 2011, the Supreme Court directed the Government to alter the ratio after hearing representations from the Staff Associations and to give promotions accordingly (2011-TIOL-74-SC-MISC). Somehow the Court directions came to be interpreted as if the new formula had to be given retrospective effect. On this assumption, certain associations/officers filed contempt petitions in the Supreme Court against the then Revenue Secretary Gujral and CBEC Chairman Goel. The CBEC had changed the ratio to 13:1:2, but with prospective effect.
The Supreme Court last week dismissed the contempt petitions against both and clarified that its earlier order had no direction to apply the quota retrospectively. So, now the new ratio is applicable only prospectively.
No comments:
Post a Comment