TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (8) TMI 1490
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dent : DY.S.G.I., SC, GST ORDER Heard Mr. A. Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioners; learned CGC, Mr. V. K. Chopra for the respondent no. 1 and Mr. K. Jain, learned counsel on behalf of Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned standing counsel for respondent nos. 2 and 3. 2. By filing this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioners have assailed the order dated 15.07.2026 passed by the learned Central Administrative Tribunal, Gauhati Bench by which O.A. No. 042/00176/2022 including miscellaneous applications therein were dismissed. 3. The case of the petitioners is that petitioner no. 1 and 2 petitioner no. 3 was appointed as Tax Assistant in the Central GST and Central Excise, Vadodara Zone on 13.12....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... order is quoted below:- "It is clear that the applicants were becoming eligible for promotion in the year 2016 as per the old rules but in the year 2015 new rule came into existence and as per new rule they were not eligible for promotion, hence they were not promoted. Now, as per the new O.M. dated 26th August 2004, applicants also become eligible for promotion to the post of STA in the year 2023, as they completed 10 years of service. Hence, the respondents are directed to consider the case of applicants for promotion as per new rules for the promotion to the petitioners from the date in 2023 when they completed 10 years and become eligible as per new rule." 5. It may be stated that the respondent authorities, by a speaking o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n of India & Ors. Vs. Gulshan Kumar & Ors., O.P.(CAT) No. 173/2018, decided by the High Court of Kerala on 10.04.2019 as well as the case of Shri Khaisonthang & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors., O.A. No. 040/00173/2023 decided on 14.05.2026, held that a similar issue was already been dealt with by the Tribunal as well as by the High Court of Kerala and the applications were dismissed. Resultantly, the said O.A. no. 042/00176/2022 along with the connected miscellaneous were dismissed. 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that both the cited cases were incorrectly applied in the case of the petitioners and that the distinguishing factor of both the cases was that those were cases relating to Inspectors, whereas the petiti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ubmitted that the petitioners have not only been denied their ICTs, but they have also lost seniority and promotion. It is submitted that as per the conditions contained in the transfer orders, the petitioners are placed at the end of the list of existing Executive Assistant in the Shillong Commissionerate of the GST and Customs. Therefore if the petitioners are now repatriated back to their original Commissionerate, they would suffer irresponsible prejudice. 10. It is also submitted that had the petitioners remained in their original Commissionerate, they would have continued as Tax Assistant. In this regard, it is submitted that the respondents in their affidavit-in-opposition filed before the Central Administrative Tribunal had admitt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ecided on 10.03.2022, referred to the decision of the High Court of Kerala in the hereinbefore referred case of Gulshan Kumar (supra) and on considering the finding by the High Court of Kerala to the effect that the Central Excise and Customs Commissionerates Inspector (Central Excise, Preventive officer and Examiner) Group-D posts Recruitment Rules, 2016, do not contain any provision for the ICTs and to the contrary, stipulate that each Cadre Controlling Authority will have its own separate cadre unless otherwise directed by the Central Board of Excise and Customs, affirmed the said judgment and left it open to the respondents to revisit the policy to accommodate posting of spouses, the needs of the disabled and compassionate grounds. 1....