DPC and the SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court

Dear friends and Comrades,

As we all know, the department has filed an SLP before the Hon'ble Supreme Court against the verdict of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras upholding the order of the Hon'ble CAT, Chennai, in the matter of implementation of the N.R.Parmar judgment.

The AIACEGEO had impleaded in the CAT case and also approached the Hon'ble High Court for a suspension of 'Stay' granted by the Hon'ble Tribunal, 'without going into the merits of the case'. The Hon'ble High Court had granted a suspension of the stay subject to the final decision of the Hon'ble Tribunal.  The Hon'ble Tribunal disposed of the matter with a final order directing the UOI to recast the seniority lists as per the Judgment in N.R.Parmar case and quashed the seniority list not prepared as per the said judgment.

The Department appealed against the order of the Hon'ble CAT before the Hon'ble High Court of Madras and thereafter went in for a review.  In both attempts the Department's effort failed.

In the meanwhile, the DPC was conducted based on the Seniority list which had been quashed by the Hon'ble CAT and this became a matter of contempt by the petitioners in the case.

We requested the CBEC to approach the Court seeking permission to conduct DPC on an ad hoc basis with an undertaking to recast the seniority list as per the N R Parmar judgment within a time frame as has been done in the CBDT.

The CBEC however decided to prefer an SLP on a question of law as to whether the N.R.Parmar decision would apply to those who had joined prior to 1.3.86.  This patently is illogical, since for those who joined prior to 1.3.86, there has to be some basis for fixing seniority and if the 1986 O.M does not apply, it will be the 1959 O.M.  Thus it was apparent that the SLP itself was only to bury the issue for ages, by getting it admitted and making it a Civil Appeal.  Hence, we had again put pressure on the CBEC to obtain permission of the Court with an undertaking as all along suggested by us.

The Department filed an I.A before the Hon'ble Supreme Court requesting permission to conduct DPC but failed to give any undertaking regarding implementation of N.R.Parmar decision.

As an association, we cannot allow a judicial verdict given by the highest Court of the land to be buried for ever.  However, we also want our senior (the real seniors) to get promoted so that the vacant posts do not remain so.  Accordingly, we had instructed our Advocate to plead for a time frame to implement the decision in N.R.Parmar while adhoc promotions are ordered.

However, in the hearing on 2.4.2018, the Hon'ble Supreme Court decided to take up the SLP itself for disposal on 11.4.18.

Thus the matter now is whether the question of law raised by the department is sustainable.

All of us are officers of law and it is not required to explain the pith and substance of the issue on hand.

I have been told that the former SG, who is also a beneficiary of the ad hoc promotions conducted last year and which has become a matter of contempt pending before the Hon'ble High Court, is attempting to intervene in the above matter, where he has no locus standi, and is requesting for funds and contributions to his account.

His request for funds directly from people clearly shows that he is not having any units to support him.

Many have called me up and said that when he has not given accounts to the new AIB of the AIACEGEO, NOR THE NEW UNIT OFFICE BEARERS OF DELHI UNIT, HOW HE CAN BE ALLOWED TO COLLECT FUNDS FOR FILING IA AGAINST THE GENERAL INTEREST OF SUPERINTENDENTS.

It is for the members to understand the designs and safeguard their own money and the interests of the Cadre.  Any funds, if necessary should be collected only through the units.  That is what is organisational discipline.

But such things are only in respect of those who run organisations.  Not those who run errands.

fraternally,
R. Manimohan, 
S.G., AIACEGEO.