Madras High Court
All India Association Of Central ... vs Ajay Bhushan Pandey on 25 August, 2023
Cont.Petn.No.1133 of 2020
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 25.08.2023
CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE D.KRISHNAKUMAR
and
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P. B.BALAJI
Cont.Petn.No.1133 of 2020
All India Association of Central Excise Gazetted
Executive Officer Association,
rep. by its President B.Chandramouli,
No.20, Ramanujam Street, T.Nagar,
Chennai 600 017. ... Petitioner
Vs.
1. Ajay Bhushan Pandey, Revenue Secretary,
Ministry of Finance, Department of Revenue,
North Block, New Delhi 110 001.
2. M.Ajit Kumar, Chairman,
Central Board of Excise and Customs,
North Block, New Delhi 110 001.
3. G.V.Krishna Rao, Chief Commissioner of Central Excise,
26/1, Mahatma Gandhi Road, Nungambakkam,
Chennai 600 034. ... Respondents
Page 1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Cont.Petn.No.1133 of 2020
Prayer: Contempt Petition filed under Section 11 of the Contempt of Courts
Act to punish the respondents for willful disobedience of the order passed
by this Court in W.P.No.5611/2017 dated 25.04.2017.
For Petitioner : Mr.V.Vijayshankar
For Respondents : Mr.AR.L.Sundaresan,
Additional Solicitor General,
for Mr.Rajnish Pahiyil
ORDER
(Order of the Court was delivered by D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.)
This Contempt Petition has been filed by the All India Association of
Central Excise Gazetted Executive Officer Association to punish the
respondents for willful disobedience of the order passed by this Court in
W.P.No.5611/2017 dated 25.04.2017.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that, the present
contempt petition has been filed, for non compliance of the order passed by
this Court in respect of the members of the petitioner association, since the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Cont.Petn.No.1133 of 2020
respondents have revised the seniority by applying N.R.Parmar's case, only
in respect of the individuals, who were the applicants in the original
applications before the Tribunal. Therefore, he seeks for implementation of
of the order passed by this court to the members of the petitioner
association.
3. It is vehemently argued by the learned Additional Solicitor General
appearing for the respondents that, the order of the Tribunal is very clear,
directing the authorities concerned to draft a seniority list following the
N.R.Parmar case and also the order in O.A.741 and 692/2013 of the
Tribunal in Mumbai Bench, which was confirmed by Mumbai High Court,
by giving seniority to the applicants from the date of initiation of
recruitment process. Therefore, the Tribunal has passed the above order
only in favour of the applicants/individuals. He further submitted that the
Association was impleaded as ninth respondent in the above said
O.A.No.1237/2016, wherein, the association had sought to vacate the
interim order granted by the Tribunal, however, now, by filing this contempt
petition, has taken a different stand and sought to implementation of the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Cont.Petn.No.1133 of 2020
order. Further more, this contempt petition has been filed after a lapse of 3
years from the date of order in W.P.No.5611/2017 on 25.04.2017 and hence
it is barred by limitation. Hence, he prayed for dismissal of the contempt
petition, as it is not maintainable.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned
Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondents and we have
perused the materials on record.
5. Originally, three persons, namely P.Bharathan, R.Mahendran, and
S.H.Karthikeyan had filed O.A.No.1237/2016 before the Central
Administrative Tribunal, Madras Bench seeking to quash the impugned
orders; and consequently direct the respondents to revise the seniority list
of Inspectors of Central Excise of Direct Recruits and Promottee officers by
impleading the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in N.R.Parmar's
case with respective effect; and to place them at appropriate slots in the
revised seniority list of Inspectors of Central Excise, taking into account
their recruitment year i.e. 1983; consequent refixing of seniority in the
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Cont.Petn.No.1133 of 2020
seniority list of superintendents; and also to consider their name for
promotion to the grade of Assistant Commissioner of Central Excise. In
that application, the present petitioner association was subsequently
impleaded as ninth respondent.
6. The above application in O.A.No.1237/2016 was heard together
along with connected applications and all the applications in
O.As.No.1237/2016, 1454/2015 and 1536/2016 were allowed by the
Tribunal, vide common order dated 10.01.2017. Challenging the above said
order, the Department had filed W.P.Nos.5611 to 5613 of 2017 and the
same were dismissed by this Court, vide order dated 25.04.2017. Now, to
implement the order of the court, contempt petition has been filed.
7. The present contempt petition has not been filed by the petitioner
in the writ petition in W.P.No.5611/2017 as well as in O.A.No.1237/2016,
whereas, filed by the Association, who is the ninth respondent in the above
said proceedings to implement the order of the Court by the Department as
far as its members concerned. At this juncture, it is to be mentioned that if at
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Cont.Petn.No.1133 of 2020
all the members of the association is having any grievance, it is for them to
approach the authorities concerned seeking remedy and on such request
made by the individual, it is for the respondent concerned to consider the
same. Therefore, we are of the view that, by way of filing contempt
petition, the petitioner association cannot seek remedy to implement the
order of the court in respect to its members also. As such, we are not
inclined to entertain this contempt petition.
8. Accordingly, the contempt petition is dismissed.
(D.K.K.J.) (P.B.B.J.)
25.08.2023
Internet: Yes/No
Index : Yes/No
mst
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Cont.Petn.No.1133 of 2020
D.KRISHNAKUMAR, J.
and
P. B.BALAJI, J.
mst
Cont. Petn. No.1133 of 2020
25.08.2023
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
