O.P.(CAT) 2155/2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN THURSDAY, THE 7TH JULY 2011 / 16TH ASHADHA 1933 OP (CAT).No. 2155 of 2011(Z) ---------------------------- OA.331/2011 OF TRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL,ERNAKULAM BENCH .................... PETITIONER -------------- K.B.MOHANDAS, SUPERINTENDENT OF CENTRAL EXCISE, SERVICE TAX DIVISION, KATHRIKADAVU, COCHIN-682017. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS, I.S.PRESS ROAD, COCHIN-682018. 2. COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE & CUSTOMS, CENTRAL REVENUE BUILDINGS, I.S.PRESS ROAD, COCHIN-682018. 3. CHAIRMAN, CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001. 4. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI-110 001. ADV. SRI.THOMAS MATHEW NELLIMOOTTIL,SC,CB EX FOR R4 THIS OP (CAT) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: O.P.(CAT) 2155/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE O.A. NOS. 331/2011 FILED BEFORE THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH. EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF THE MISC. APPLICATION ON 06.06.2011. EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16.6.2011 IN O.A. NO. 331/2011 OF THE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, ERNAKULAM BENCH. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL. // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE. KNC/- C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = O.P. (CAT) NO. 2155 OF 2011 = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 7TH DAY OF JULY, 2011. J U D G M E N T C.N. Ramachandran Nair, J. This original petition is filed challenging the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, declining to direct the respondents to appoint the petitioner as the superintendent in the Air Cargo Complex. Petitioner's main grievance is that the Department communicated to the Tribunal the reason for denying posting to the petitioner through a sealed cover without giving copy of the contents to the petitioner. We find force in the contention of the petitioner that the Department cannot rely on materials against the petitioner without giving copy and giving him an opportunity to explain his stand. However, in this case what we find from the order of the Tribunal is that not only the petitioner but several other superintendents who requested for posting to Air Cargo Complex were denied posting because many are involved in some case or other either vigilance or CBI cases. Petitioner's case is that in his case Vigilance has cleared his posting and so much so, there is no stigma for him. However, standing counsel who took O.P.(CAT) 2155/2011 2 notice on admission, submitted that petitioner is charged by the CBI and though he got acquitted, appeal by the CBI is pending before this Court. It is the finding of the Tribunal that petitioner has no right to ask for any posting in any section which is merely within the discretion of the respondents. We do not find any ground to deviate from the view expressed by the Tribunal, more so, when the petitioner was once charge sheeted by the C.B.I. Consequently, the original petition is dismissed. C.N. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, (JUDGE). P.S. GOPINATHAN, (JUDGE) knc/-