2013 (8) TMI 723 - SC - Central Excise

Supreme Court Grants Special Leave Petition, Sets Deadlines for Seniority Lists and Promotions

Lok Ranjan Jt. Sec. Versus A. Cletus & Others

Lok Ranjan Jt. Sec. Versus A. Cletus & Others - 2015 (326) E.L.T. 463 (SC) Issues:1. Finalization of seniority list of Assistant Commissioners of Customs and Central Excise.2. Finalization of post based reservation roster for promotion.3. Promotion from Assistant Commissioners to Deputy Commissioners.4. Clarification on promotion being prospective or retrospective.Finalization of Seniority List:The Supreme Court granted leave for the special leave petition to be heard and noted that the revised seniority list of Assistant Commissioners of Customs and Central Excise up to 1996-1997 has been finalized. The government was directed to expedite the finalization of seniority lists for the remaining officers and the post based reservation roster for promotions. Deadlines were set for completing various steps in the process, ensuring completion by specific dates ranging from 2013 to 2014.Finalization of Post Based Reservation Roster:The government was instructed to finalize the post based reservation roster for promotions to higher posts by specific deadlines for different vacancy years. The court emphasized the importance of completing the process promptly to prevent further litigation and ensure deserving candidates receive promotions without delay.Promotion from Assistant Commissioners to Deputy Commissioners:It was mentioned that the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for promotions from Assistant Commissioners to Deputy Commissioners for specific years had already been conducted or would be completed within a set timeframe. The court acknowledged the government's commitment to finalizing the promotion process efficiently to avoid legal disputes and ensure timely promotions.Clarification on Promotion Prospective or Retrospective:Regarding the issue of promotion being prospective or retrospective, the court clarified that in the peculiar circumstances of the case, the promotion could be given retrospective seniority from the year the vacancies became available. This direction was issued based on the government's request and the respondent's agreement, specifying that it would not set a precedent for future cases.This judgment addressed the finalization of seniority lists, post based reservation rosters for promotions, completion of promotion processes, and provided a specific clarification on the retrospective seniority issue, ensuring a clear direction for the government to proceed with the necessary actions.