THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.10568 of 2005 Dated:15.02.2008 Between: The Chairman, Central Board of Excise and Customs, Government of A.P., reptd., by its Principal Secretary to Government, Finance and Planning Department, Hyderabad and five others. ..... PETITIONERS And Vasanthapuram Raju and 7 others .....RESPONDENTS THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU WRIT PETITION No.10568 of 2005 ORAL ORDER: (per the HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA) Heard the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India, High Court of Andhra Pradesh, Hyderabad, appearing for the petitioners, as well as the learned counsel appearing for the respondents. 2. This writ of certiorari is filed, under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking to call for the records pertaining to the order, dated 27.12.2004, passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Hyderabad Bench at Hyderabad (for brevity “the Tribunal”), disposing of the application O.A.No.1318 of 2003, filed by the respondents herein, and quash the same. 3. Petitioners are respondents and respondents are applicants in the O.A., before the Tribunal. 4. The reliefs sought for by the respondents, in the said O.A., is; (1) to call for the records pertaining to the promotions, vide Establishment Order (NGO) No.01/2003, dated 03.01.2003, and to declare that they have been promoted on regular basis, following due procedure, (2) to set aside the Establishment Order (NGO) No.53/2003, dated 10.11.2003, passed by respondent No.5, reverting the respondents herein from the post of Lower Division Clerks to the cadre of Sepoys on fictitious grounds and without affording reasonable opportunity, by declaring the same as arbitrary and illegal and (3) to direct the petitioners herein to continue them as Lower Division Clerks as per their promotional orders, vide Establishment Order (NGO) No.01/2003, dated 03.01.2003, with all consequential benefits. 5. It appears, some of the Sepoys were promoted as Lower Division Clerks in Grade-D on 03.01.2003. The said promotions were made on commissionerate basis instead of region/zone basis. 6. The alleged discrepancy had been brought to the notice of the competent authority and, having realized the folly, the competent authority had effected some reversions in order to implement the correct rule of promotions i.e., on region/zone basis. The said action was questioned by way of O.A., which was disposed of by the Tribunal, without directing to put the affected parties on notice. Further, the Tribunal did not go into the merits of the case or carved out the method of promotion, may it be on region/zone basis or commissionerate basis. It further directed to effect the promotions on commissionerate basis, after the respondents were put on notice. Hence, the writ petition. 7. At the outset, we are of the view that the Tribunal, while ordering notice before effecting any reversions, cannot simultaneously direct the petitioners to make promotions on commissionerate basis. These two findings are totally on two different standards; the former -- following the principle of audi alteram partem and the latter being on merits. 8. When the Tribunal had directed the petitioners to put the respondents on notice, in normal course, it ought not to have carved out the procedure for promotion. 9. However, we are not expressing any view on that aspect in view of the fact put before this Court by the learned Assistant Solicitor General, appearing for the petitioners, that the case of the respondents would be considered for promotion in the existing vacancies. He also submits, upon being questioned by this Court, that there is likelihood of all the respondents being promoted in the existing vacancies, but there is no assertion, as such. He also submits that there are number of vacancies in which the respondents can be accommodated. 10. However, without going deep into this subject, since the only issue involved, as also pointed out by the Tribunal, is that the principles of natural justice have been violated and since there was a positive direction to the petitioners to follow the said principles of natural justice and initiate action, we do not propose to express our view on merits. 11. Accordingly, the impugned order, passed by the Tribunal, insofar as it relates to effecting the promotions on commissionerate basis, at the threshold i.e., even before following the principles of natural justice, is concerned, is not proper. 12. For the foregoing, suffice it to close the writ petition with a direction to the writ petitioners to put all the affected parties on notice and take appropriate action in accordance with law. 13. With the above direction, the writ petition is closed. There shall be no order as to costs. 14. It is needless to mention that the aggrieved persons can always ventilate their grievance before the Tribunal. _______________________ JUSTICE D.S.R.VARMA _____________________ JUSTICE K.C.BHANU 15TH FEBRUARY 2008 DR