IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2011 / 28TH ASHADHA 1933 OP (CAT).No. 1012 of 2011(S) ---------------------------- AGAINST ORDER DATED 04/11/2010 IN OA.679/2009 of CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONERS ------------------------------- 1. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, COCHIN - 682 018. 2. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDING, I.S. PRESS ROAD, COCHIN - 682 018. 3. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS, MANANCHIRA, CALICUT - 673 001. 4. JOINT COMMISSIONER (P&V) CENTRAL EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS, MANANCHIRA, CALICUT - 673 001. 5. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, PALAKKAD DIVISION II, PALAKKAD. 6. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI - 1. BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL,SC,CB EX RESPONDENT(S): --------------- V.K.PUSHPAVALLY, INSPECTOR OF CENTRAL EXCISE, (NOW PROMOTED AS SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE) CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS, I.S.PRESS ROAD, COCHIN - 682 018. ADV. SRI.C.S.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR FOR R1 SMT.CHANDINI G.NAIR FOR R1 THIS OP (CAT) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP (CAT) NO.1012/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF CAT ORDER DATED 04/11/2010 IN OA NO.679/2009. P2 : COPY OF OA NO.679/2009. P3 : COPY OF REPLY STATEMENT FILED ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS IN O.A.NO.679/2009. P4 : COPY OF STATEMENT FILED BY THE COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... OP(CAT) No.1012 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 19th day of July, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. Heard learned Standing Counsel who filed the OP(CAT) for the Central Excise and learned counsel for the respondent. 2. The challenge is against the order of the CAT directing restoration of promotion as Superintendent to the respondent with effect from the date on which when her immediate junior was promoted overlooking her claim. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that the reason for overlooking the respondent is the adverse or below bench mark remark in the Confidential Report for the year 2004-05. However, the case of the respondent is that on her complaint against the adverse remark in the Confidential Report, higher authority deleted and substituted the same with an entry “good”. The CAT held that denial of promotion was illegal and consequently the respondent was entitled to promotion with retrospective effect. Learned Standing Counsel submitted that OP(CAT).No.1012/2011 2 later she was promoted in 2010, whereas her immediate junior was promoted in 2009. 3. After hearing both sides, we do not find any ground to interfere with the finding of the Tribunal because when adverse remark is deleted and substituted by higher authority the same takes effect from the date of original entry, and so much so, the respondent is entitled to promotion from the date on which it was denied to her on account of the adverse entry in the Confidential Report, which no longer survives. We, therefore do not find any merit in the OP(CAT) and the same is accordingly dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) jg