Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2026) 10 CAT CK 3619

Shri B. Raja Ambedkar vs The Revenue Secretary To Government Of India & Ors.

Central Administrative Tribunal, Cuttack · Decided on 16 October 2026

HON’BLE JUDGES
Sudhi Ranjan Mishra, Member (J) · Pramod Kumar Das, Member (A)
CASE NUMBER
O.A.No. 260/00398 of 2024

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

8 paragraphs · 734 words

SUDHI RANJAN MISHRA, MEMBER (J):

Without extraneous details, suffice it to say that the applicant has filed this OA with prayer to direct the Respondents to promote him to the post of Assistant Commissioner with effect from the date others were promoted vide Office Order dated 15.07.2023, after quashing the order dated 29th July, 2024, rejecting his representation for giving him promotion.

2.

In the counter so also in course of hearing, it is the case of the Respondents that the applicant vide order dated 24.12.2020 was promoted to the grade of Assistant Commissioner on ad hoc basis against the vacancy year 2019 on the basis of his seniority position [Sl.No. 5121] in the All India Seniority List of Superintendent of Central Excise for the period 1998-2006. Consequent upon his promotion, he was posted to Ranchi GST & CZ Zone vide office order No. 59/2021 dated 04.06.2021 by the CBIT&C. He was relieved from Kakinada Customs House, Vijayawada on 23.07.2021 to join at his new place of posting at Ranchi. Instead of joining at his new place of posting, he applied for leave/extension of leave and challenged his transfer at legal forum and remained on unauthorized absent from 03.08.2021 to 15.08.2022. Consequent upon revision of seniority in compliance of the order of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of B.S.Murthy & Others vs UOI and Others, dated 15.03.2022 in Civil Appeal (CA ) No. 3968 of 2009, review DPC was held on 30.06.2023 for considering promotion to the grade of Assistant Commissioner. As per the revised position in the seniority list in the grade of Superintendent, the case of the applicant was to be assessed against the vacancy year 2021 instead of the year 2019 as was done earlier. The Review DPC met on 30.06.2023 which assessed the case of the applicant against the vacancy year 2021. Since meanwhile departmental proceedings were initiated against him for his unauthorized absence from 03.08.2021 to 15.08.2021 vide charge Memo dated 05.12.2022, the recommendation of the DPC was kept in a sealed cover. It is stated that his case was also considered by the DPC against the vacancy year 2022 but the recommendation of the DPC was again kept in a sealed cover due to pendency of the proceedings. The DPC for the vacancy year 2023 deferred his assessment due to lack of APAR. According to the Respondents, Charge Memo dated 05.12.2022 was withdrawn on 22.04.2024 and fresh charge sheet for the same set of allegation was issued on 27.06.2024. Accordingly, Respondents contested and objected the case of the applicant for grant of the relief prayed for in this OA.

3.

Applicant has also filed rejoinder countering the stand taken by the Respondents and making endeavour to justify as to how the action of the Respondents keeping the recommendation in a sealed cover is not justifiable.

4.

The matter was heard in extenso and was reserved for final order. Learned Counsel appearing for the Applicant filed a Memo dated 12.10.2026, after serving copy thereof on the other side, enclosing thereto a copy of the final order No. GADT/VIG/MISC/97/2022-P&V/O/o COMMR-CGST-ADT-BHUBANESWAR dated 08.10.2026 passed by the Disciplinary Authority exonerating him from the allegation; which was subject matter of the disciplinary proceedings vide Charge Memo No. 1/2024 dated 27.06.2024. The said Memo is kept on record.

5.

In view of the order dated 08.10.2026 filed by the learned Counsel for the Applicant, there remains nothing further to be adjudicated in this OA and, as per the law laid down by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Union Of India Etc. Etc vs K.V. Jankiraman, 1991 AIR 2010, the applicant is entitled to the relief claimed in this OA.

6.

Resultantly, this OA is allowed with direction to the Respondents to open the sealed cover and act upon the recommendation of the DPC, wherein the assessment in respect of applicant has been kept, within a period of 30 (thirty) days upon receipt of a copy of this order. In case, he is found fit by the DPC, issue appropriate order, if there is no other impediment, within another period of 30 (thirty) days promoting and posting him to the post of Assistant Commissioner at Bhubaneswar GST & CZ Zone, with effect from the date when others including his juniors were promoted, with grant of all consequential service and financial benefits.

7.

There shall be no order as to costs.