N. Sengupta, J. - (1.) The applicant, who joined as a Sub -Inspector in Central Excise in June 1960, has prayed for regularisation of his appointment as Cost Accounts Officer / Assistant Director (Cost) and a direction not to revert him from the post he is holding/held.
(2.) Many of the facts averred by the applicant are rather undisputed. The applicant joined service in the Central Excise as a Sub -Inspector on 9.6.60. In due course, he was promoted as an Inspector of Central Excise on 1.8.72. Before entering into service, he had not graduated and he, while in service, acquired the Degree of B.A. and also a Membership of Institute of Cost and Works Accountants of India. The Membership qualification was acquired in 1976. In 1978, there was a proposal for filling up the post of Cost Accounts Officer in the Central Excise Deptt in the scale of Rs. 700 -1300/ (pre -revised) and in that connection an order was passed on 21.12.78. On 28.12.78, option was called for from persons having the requisite qualifications desirous of joining the post. The applicant exercised his option on 2.1.79. However, again on 16.9.81. fresh options were called for filling up the post of Cost Accounts Officer in the Central Excise Deptt. and the applicant opted and he was offered appointment in July 1984. On 29.9.84, vide Annexure -F the applicant was appointed as Cost Accounts Officer on deputation basis in the scale of pay of Rs. 700 -1300/ - for a period of two years and was posted as Cost Accounts Officer in Calcutta -II Collectorate of Central Excise. However, the appointment was given retrospective effect from 24.7.84. Even though the appointment was on deputation basis, yet no deputation allowance was paid. By the date of presentation of this application, the applicant had put in more than four years of service as Cost Accounts Officer in the Central Excise Deptt. The applicant has further unveiled that as there was no complaint against his functioning as Cost Accounts Officer and as he continued for more than four years in that post, he is entitled to be regularised against that post. He has further stated that he made representation in this regard in January, 1986, March, 1987 and on 14.1.88 Annexure -A series and K. But the representations were not disposed of till the filing of this application. The applicant's case further is that there has been a proposal to revert him from the post of Cost Accounts Officer to the post of Inspector, the post of Inspector is in Group C and the post of Cost Accounts Officer is in Group A. He has taken the ground that there could not be any deputation as he was asked to serve in the same department in which he had been serving previous to his holding the post of Cost Accounts Officer. Therefore, the mention of the expression "on deputation basis" in his appointment order is a misnomer.
(3.) The respondents in their reply have taken the stand that the applicant was asked to look after the charge of Cost Accounts Officer on deputation basis for a temporary period of two years and the said period was extended from time to time. The applicant, in fact, was aware of the fact that he was asked to temporarily hold the charge of the post and this would be evident from his representation dated 5.7.85 for giving him promotion as Inspector, of Central Excise, Selection Grade. The applicant was working in Group C post and he had been on such post. He had not been promoted to any Group B post and since the post of Cost Accounts Officer is a Group -A post, the applicant could claim promotion to that post only after he had been promoted to a Group B post, but he not having been promoted to any Group B post cannot claim promotion to Group A post or to continue in such a post. The post of Cost Accounts Officer has been abolished and a post of Assistant Director (Cost) has been created. This post of Asst. Director (Cost) is under the Department of Expenditure under the Ministry of Finance whereas the post of Cost Accounts Officer was in the Deptt of Revenue. Since the post of Cost Accounts Officer has been abolished, the applicant cannot claim regularisation against any such non -existent post.;