Anda di halaman 1dari 7

BEFORE THE HON'BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL MADRAS BENCH

O.A. No. 167 OF 2009


APPLICANT: -
M. Subramaniam, aged 41 years,
S/o D. Mani, Inspector of Central Excise,
Audit Section, O/o the Commissioner of Central Excise,
Anaimedu, Salem 636 001, permanently residing at
369, Pudu Erikarai Road,
Ayyanar Nagar, Reddiyur,
Salem 636 004
-VS-
RESPONDENTS: -
1. UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE
MINISTRY OF FINANCE, NEW DELHI.
2. THE CHAIRMAN,
CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE & CUSTOMS,
NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI.
3. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE, CUSTOMS
& SERVICE TAX, TAMILNADU ZONE,
121, MAHATMA GANDHI ROAD, NUNGAMBAKKAM,
CHENNAI 600 034.

4. The COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE,


NO1, FOULKES COMPOUND, ANAIMEDU,
SALEM 636 001.

Address for service of the Applicant is that of their counsel _____________Advocate and Address for
service of the respondents is that of their respective address as shown above.

ORIGINAL APPLICATION FILED UNDER SECTION 19 OF THE ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL’S ACT 1985
DETAILS OF THE APPLICATION.
1. PARTICULARS OF THE ORDER AGAINST WHICH THE APPLICATION IS MADE:-
(1) Order C.No.II/24/1/2008 Bills-6cpc dated 16.9.2008 issued by the 4th Respondent.
(Annexure A-1)
(2) Letter F. No. 26017/98/2008-Ad.II.A dated 11.2.2009 issued on behalf of the 2nd
Respondent. (Annexure A-2)
2. JURISDICTION OF THE TRIBUNAL: -
The Applicant declares that the Subject matter of the application is within the jurisdiction of
this Tribunal.
3. LIMITATION

The Applicant further declares that the application is within the limitation period prescribed
in Sec. 21 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.
4. FACTS OF THE CASE
1. The Applicant is aggrieved by the Order C.No.II/24/1/2008 Bills-6cpc dated 16.9.2008
issued by the 4th Respondent, by causing fixation of pay of the applicant in the scale of Rs. 7500-
250-12000 but with grade Pay of Rs.4800- instead of Rs. 5400/- on implementation of the
upgradation of the Pay scale as per the ACP Scheme of the Government of India. The true copy of
the said order is produced herewith and marked as Annexure A-1. The applicant is further
aggrieved by the Letter F. No. 26017/98/2008-Ad.II.A dated 11.2.2009 issued on behalf of the 2nd
Respondent as per which the “Grade Pay of Rs. 5400- in the pay band PB-2” can be given on
completion of 4 years of regular service in the grade pay of Rs. 4800- in PB-2 (pre-revised scale of
Rs. 7500-12000) after regular promotion and not on account of financial upgradation due to ACP,
and so not to be given to the Inspectors of Central excise on upgradation of pay, as per ACP
Scheme. The true copy of the said letter is also produced herewith and marked as Annexure A-2.

2. The Applicant is presently working as an Inspector of Central Excise in the office of the
Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem Commissionerate. The Applicant joined the department as
an Inspector of Central Excise on 16.01.1992. Even after putting in 17 years of service in the same
cadre he is yet to be promoted as Superintendent of Central Excise due to the stagnation of the
Inspector cadre. It is submitted that Inspectors of Central Excise are the cutting edge of the
executive arm of the Department deployed for the collection of Central Excise & Customs duties
and Service Tax, for prevention of evasion of taxes and smuggling activities, for patrolling of
frontiers and coastline; for prevention of trafficking in narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances,
and various other allied functions. The Inspectors of Central Excise also work in agencies like
Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Directorate of Central Excise Intelligence, Economic
Intelligence Bureau and Narcotic Control Bureau.
2

3. It is respectfully submitted that the Inspector of Central Excise was in the pre-revised pay
scale of Rs. 6500-10500 and the Superintendent of Central Excise was in the pre-revised scale of
Rs. 7500-12000. Consequent to the implementation of the 6th Central pay Commission report,
Inspectors of Central Excise has been placed in pay band 2 with a grade pay of Rs. 4200/- and the
Superintendent of Central Excise in pay band 2 with a grade pay of Rs. 4800/- and a grade pay of
Rs. 5400/- after a period of 4 years. As per the present hierarchy of cadres, Superintendent of
Central Excise is the immediate promotion post of Inspector of Central Excise.

4. It is submitted that 2/3rd of the posts of Inspectors of Central Excise is filled up through
direct recruitment on the basis of examinations and personality test conducted by the Staff
Selection Commission and the physical tests conducted by the Department. The post of Preventive
Officer of Customs and Examiner of Customs in the Custom Houses of the Department are also
filled by the same examination. All the three posts carry the same pay scale and same level of
responsibilities. The post of Inspector of Central Excise is highly stagnating cadre and a direct
recruit Inspector, gets his 1st and in most cases the last promotion after a period of 16 to 22 years.
This has caused large-scale resentment and frustration among the cadre. This is compounded by
the fact that the equally placed cadres of Preventive Officer and Examiner of the Customs
Department get their promotion within 6 to 10 years.

5. While so the 5th Central pay Commission observed in paragraph 22.31 of the report that
the recommended ACP scheme aims at providing a minimum of two promotions to each Group ‘B’,
‘C’ and ‘D’ employee and three promotions to each Group ‘A’ employee in the entire career span,
after appointment in a grade on direct recruitment basis. The proposed promotion under the
scheme shall however be restricted to financial upgradation in the pay scale alone and shall not be
linked to the availability of a post in the higher grade on functional basis. The salient features of
the scheme recommended by the Commission were that Financial Up gradation will be in the next
higher grade in accordance with the existing hierarchy in a cadre/category of posts and that on
promotion to the next higher grade under the Assured Career Progression Scheme, the full benefit
of pay fixation in the higher scale as in case of promotion in a higher grade shall be given and on
promotion in the higher scale on occurrence of a vacancy, no further financial benefit shall accrue.
The stagnating cadre of Inspectors of Central Excise received some respite on the introduction of
the Assured Career Progression Scheme as per the recommendations of the 5 th Central pay
Commission. The truecopy of the ACP Scheme issued as per OM No. 35034/1/97-Estt(D) dated
9.8.99 by the Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Government of India is
produced herewith and marked as Annexure A-3. In terms of the A-3 OM, the employees are
entitled to two financial up gradations in the 12th and 24th year of service.

6. Consequentially the 2nd Respondent as per Letter C.No.II/3/136/99-Estt dated 9-9-2003


issued Order No. 116/2003 specifying that the applicant is provided 1 st Financial Up gradation
under the ACP Scheme to the pay scale of Superintendent of Central Excise. Accordingly, the
applicant was granted the pay scale of Superintendent of Central Excise under the ACP scheme
with effect from 01.01.2004 in the pay sale of Rs. 7500-250-12000 vide Assistant Commissioner of
Central Excise, Salem-II Division C.No.II/24/01/2003 dated 11.8.2004. The above two references
are placed as Annexure A4 and A5 respectively.

7. While so the Government of India vide Resolution No. 1/1/2008 IC dated 29.08.2008 of the
Department of Expenditure, Ministry of Finance accepted the recommendations of the 6 th Central
pay Commission with the modification inter alia that Group ‘B’ Officers of the Department of Posts,
Revenue etc. will be granted grade pay of Rs. 5400/- in PB2 on non-functional basis after 4 years of
regular service in the grade pay of Rs. 4800/- in PB-2. This appears in Clause (X)(e) of the
Resolution wherein it is indicated that “Group-B officers of the Department of Posts, Revenue etc.
will be granted Grade Pay of Rs. 5400- in PB2 on non-functional basis after 4 years of regular
service in the Grade Pay of Rs. 4800 in PB-2”. The true copy of the said resolution No. 1/1/2008-I C.
dated 29.8.2008 published in the Gazette of India is also produced herewith and marked as
Annexure A-6. The Central Civil Service (Revised Pay) Rules 2008 was also notified by the
Government with effect from 01.01.2006 and as per Section II of Part C of the First Schedule of the
Rules the Income Tax Officer, Superintendent, Appraiser etc. (Customs & Central Excise) under the
Department of Revenue has been granted a grade pay of Rs. 4800/- and a grade pay of Rs. 5400/-,
after 4 years.

8. Hence the applicant an Inspector of Central Excise, a Group B officer under the
Department of Revenue placed in the grade pay of Rs. 4800/- corresponding to the pre-revised
scale of Rs. 7500-12000, on the first financial upgradation under the 1999 ACP scheme became
entitled for the grade pay of Rs. 5400/- after a period of 4 years. When a doubt arose as to how
the 4 year period is to be counted for the purpose of granting non-functional up gradation to Group
B officers, the Central Board of Excise & Customs, in consultation with the Department of
Expenditure examined the question and rightly clarified that the 4 year period is to be counted
with effect from the date on which an officer is placed in the pay scale of Rs. 7500-12000 (pre-
revised). Thus if an officer has completed 4 years on 01.01.2006 or earlier, he will be given the
nonfunctional upgradation with effect from 01.01.2006 and if he completed 4 years on a date after
1.1.2006, he will be given non financial upgradation from such date on which he completes 4 years
in the pay scale Rs 7500-12000 (pre-revised). The truecopy of the said clarification issued as per
3

Letter F. No. A.26017/98/2008-Ad II A dated 21.11.2008 issued on behalf of the 2nd Respondent is
also produced herewith and marked as Annexure A-7.

Based on the above resolution A-6, ACP scheme A-3 and A-7 clarification the Applicant
was to be provided a Grade Pay of Rs. 5400/- from 01.01.2008 onwards when he had completed 4
years of regular service in the pay scale Rs. 7500-250-12000. Whileso it would appear that A-2
clarification has been issued by the same authority contradicting their own A-7 clarification,
directing that the grade Pay of Rs.5400 need not be given to those who are drawing the salary of
Superintendents by ACP. In para 3 of the above A2 clarification it has been stated that “… Non
functional upgradation to the grade pay of Rs. 5400 in the pay band PB-2 can be given on
completion of 4 years of regular service in the grade pay of Rs. 4800- in P2 (pre revised scale of
Rs. 7500-12000) after regular promotion and not on account of financial upgradation due to ACP.”
The above view is totally unfair and incorrect due to the fact that in the ACP scheme (A3) under
para 3.2 it has been specifically clarified that ‘Regular Service’ for the purpose of the ACP
Scheme shall be interpreted to mean the eligibility service counted for regular promotion in terms
of relevant Recruitment/Service Rules. Further in the ACP order issued to the applicant (A5) it has
been specifically mentioned that the applicant is placed in the pay scale of Superintendents and is
eligible for financial benefits on being placed in the said pay scale. Thus the Rs. 5400- Grade pay
being a financial benefit for the Superintendents pay scale Rs. 7500-12000 those who have
completed 4 years of regular service are to be fixed with grade pay Rs. 5400-. Thus the applicant
has completed 4 years of regular service in the Superintendents pay scale Rs. 7500-12000 on
1.1.2008 and is to be fixed Grade Pay of Rs. 5400- from 1.1.2008 onwards. Hence the action of
the Respondents in not providing the right Grade Pay to the applicant is highly arbitrary and is
against the aim of the ACP scheme and the resolution of the Government of India as evidenced
clearly in the clarification A-7.

The applicant is highly prejudiced by Annexure A-1 order and A-2 clarification which would
result in incorrect fixation of his pay, in spite of his clear entitlement, as per A-3, A-6 and A-7
clarification. Under the above circumstances, the applicant is having no other efficacious
alternative remedy other than to approach this Honourable Tribunal in the interest of justice.
5. GROUNDS FOR RELIEFS WITH LEGAL PROVISIONS
A. The action of the respondent in issuing A-1 order fixing grade pay at Rs. 4800- to the
applicant even after 1.1.2008 when the applicant had completed 4 years of service in the pay
scale Rs. 7500-12000 and not fixing the grade pay as Rs. 5400 based on an incorrect clarification
A2 issued, is highly irregular, illegal and arbitrary and is violative of all canons of law of natural
justice. The action of the 4th respondent in issuing A-1 order fixing lesser grade pay than the
specified higher grade pay is highly arbitrary. Further the clarification A-2 issued by the first
respondent contradicting the clarification A-7 issued already is quite unbecoming of a premier
department of the Government of India like the Central excise Department.

B. As can be seen from A-3 Scheme, due to the delay in granting promotions, an upgradation
to the pay scale of the next higher post, in the instant case to the level of the Superintendent of
Central excise, is granted by the Government of India as per the recommendations of the Vth CPC.
The provisions of the A-3 scheme has been formulated by the Department of Personnel of the
Ministry of Personnel, Public grievances and Pensions, and any clarifications relating to the same is
to be issued by the said Ministry and not by the Department. As per the ACP Scheme the financial
upgradation granted on the basis of the A-3 scheme to an Inspector is to the pay scale of
Superintendents. As per A-6 resolution of the Government of India, 2 pay scales are attached to
the post of Superintendents and both are applicable to an Inspector on functional promotion. In
fact it is pertinent here to point out that the ACP benefits itself are granted due to the lack of
promotional avenues and to avoid stagnation in the cadres. The idea behind the orders of the
Government of India, in issuing the ACP scheme itself is to alleviate the difficulties faced by the
employees due to stagnation and as the opening sentence of the said scheme;
“ The ACP scheme needs to be viewed as a ‘Safety net’ to deal
with the problem of genuine stagnation and hardship faced by the
employees due to lack of adequate promotional avenues.”
The present interpretation as per A-2 without even consulting the concerned ministry which
issued A-3 Scheme defeats the very purpose and intention of the scheme itself. Moreover as can
be seen from para 3.1 of the OM;
“Keeping in view of all relevant factors, it has, therefore, been decided to grant
two financial upgradations as recommended by the fifth Central Pay Commission
and also on accordance with the Agreed Settlement dated September 11,1997(in
relation to group ’C’ and ‘D’ employees) entered into with the staff side of the
National Council (JCM) under the ACP scheme to Group ‘ B’ ‘C’ and ‘D’ employees
on completion of 12 years and 24 years (subject to condition no.4 in Annexure I) of
regular service respectively.”
The idea is to upgrade the pay of an official to that of the higher promotional post when there is a
defined hierarchy and to grant all financial benefits attached to the post irrespective of the
availability of vacancy in that cadre and not to restrict a portion of the benefits attached to the
posts. The present action is highly objectionable, as it is without consultation with the issuing
ministry but to the convenience of the Department, that too without benefiting anyone. The action
of the Respondents is highly irregular and is to be interfered by this Hon'ble Tribunal in the interest
4

of justice. It is respectfully submitted that the A2 clarification issued incorrectly by the first
respondent misinterpretating the rightful position set out under ACP schemeA3, Resolution of Pay
Commission A6 and clarification dated 21.11.2008 A7 is thus is liable to set aside by this Hon'ble
Tribunal in the interest of justice.

C. It is respectfully submitted that the benefits projected by the A-3 scheme is basically
extended to those who are not getting promotions within 12 & 24 years of service in the cadre and
stagnating. In fact as can be seen from the A-3 scheme it is given irrespective of availability of the
vacancies in the promotional cadre. All financial benefits attached to the promoted post
irrespective of the functional promotions are afforded irrespective of vacancies as if the official is
promoted, is afforded. It is also pertinent here to point out that, after ACP benefits is granted,
when the official is actually functionally promoted, no benefits is granted including the fixation
benefits. In this scenario, no restrictions like in A-2 can be imposed on the officials like requirement
of a functional promotion after 4 years to afford the benefits attached to the promoted post. As
can be seen from A-6 resolution, the post of Superintendents are granted a grade pay of Rs. 5400/-
after a period of 4 years with the grade pay of Rs.4800/-. As can be seen from the A-7 clarification
as to when this is to be granted, the Department themselves has clarified that 4 year period is to
be counted with effect from the date on which an officer is placed in the pay scale of Rs. 7500-
12000 (pre-revised). Thus if an officer has completed 4 years on 01.01.2006 or earlier, he will be
given the nonfunctional upgradation with effect from 01.01.2006. In such circumstances no
restriction can be introduced now, to limit the same for functional promotion only. It is also
pertinent to point out here that if there were actual vacancies, the official would have been
regularly promoted even before 12 years in the cadre of Inspectors and would have been
promoted to the level of Superintendents much earlier. If that be so as per A-6 resolution, he would
have been placed in the 5400 grade pay much earlier. Going by the objects of the A-3 scheme and
A-7 clarification, A-2 clarification cannot be issued under any provisions of law, which is violative of
natural justice and equity. The action of the Respondents in issuing A-2 clarification and the action
of the 4th Respondent, in issuing incorrect pay fixation A-1 order is blatantly in violation of all
principles of natural justice and equity and is to be interfered by this Hon'ble Tribunal in the
interest of justice. The action of the Respondents is thus ultravires of jurisdiction, reeks with
malafide and is liable to be quashed by this Hon'ble Tribunal in the interest of justice.

D. It is respectfully submitted that the cadres of Inspector of Central Excise Department are
the cutting edge of the executive arm of the Department deployed for the collection of Central
Excise & Customs duties and Service Tax, for prevention of evasion of taxes and smuggling
activities, for patrolling of frontiers and coastline; for prevention of trafficking in narcotic drugs and
psychotropic substances, and various other allied functions. The Benefits under the ACP scheme
are restricted to financial upgradation in the pay scale alone and shall not be linked to the
availability of a post in the higher grade on functional basis. The Financial Up gradation will be in
the next higher grade in accordance with the existing hierarchy in a cadre/category of posts and
that on promotion to the next higher grade under the Assured Career Progression Scheme, the full
benefit of pay fixation in the higher scale as in case of promotion in a higher grade shall be given
and on promotion in the higher scale on occurrence of a vacancy, no further financial benefit shall
accrue. The stagnating cadre of Inspectors of Central Excise received some respite on the
introduction of the Assured Career Progression Scheme as per the recommendations of the 5th
Central pay Commission. As things stand the very objective of the scheme itself is taken away by
the clarification in A-2 letter. It is pertinent here to point out here that the clarification is issued
without any consultation with the Ministry of Personnel who has issued the scheme itself. The
action itself is irregular and is to be interfered by this Hon'ble Tribunal in the interest of Justice.

It is also submitted that if the Rs. 5400 Grade Pay is denied to ACP Inspector and it is available to
Superintendents only after completion of 4 yrs of service in 7500 scale, the applicant already
having put in 17 long years of service would be put to the irony of having to wait for few more
years for first getting promoted as Superintendent and then wait for another 4 years to get the
grade pay Rs. 5400- which is not the intention of the ACP scheme A3 and the Resolution A6.
Hence this clarification A2 providing misinterpretated view of providing grade pay Rs. 5400- by the
first respondent is to be nullified and the fourth respondent may be directed to fix grade pay of Rs.
5400- for the applicant from 1.1.2008 when he has completed 4 years of regular service in the pay
scale Rs. 7500-12000.
6. DETAILS OF REMEDIES EXHAUSTED
No other statutory remedy.
MATTERS NOT PREVIOUSLY FILED OR PENDING BEFORE ANY OTHER COURT
The Applicant further declares that the Applicant have not filed any Application, Writ
Petition or Suit, regarding the matter in respect of which this Application is made, before any Court
or any other authority or any other Bench of this Honourable Tribunal nor any such Application,
Writ Petition or Suit is pending before any of them.
7. RELIEF’S SOUGHT: -
In view of the facts mentioned in Paragraph IV and V above, the Applicants prays for the
following reliefs: -
5

(i) TO MAINTAIN THAT THE CLARIFICATION A7 ISSUED AND TO DECLARE THE CLARIFICATION A2 NULL AND VOID AS IT GOES
AGAINST THE READING OF A6 PAY COMMISSION RESOLUTION OF THE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA AND REVISED PAY RULES AND THE ACP
SCHEME A-3, IN AS MUCH AS FIXING OF GRADE PAY OF RS. 5400- TO THE APPLICANT IS CONCERNED;

(ii) TO DECLARE THAT THE APPLICANT IS ENTITLED TO THE PAY WITH GRADE PAY OF RS 5400/- FROM 1.1.2008 BASED
ON THE ACP SCHEME A-3, SIXTH PAY COMMISSION RESOLUTION A-6 AND A-7 CLARIFICATION

(III) TO ISSUE SUCH OTHER APPROPRIATE ORDERS OR DIRECTIONS THIS HON'BLE TRIBUNAL MAY DEEM FIT, JUST AND
PROPER IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE;
AND

(IV) TO GRANT THE COSTS OF THIS ORIGINAL APPLICATION.

8. INTERIM ORDER IF ANY PRAYED FOR: -


Pending final decision of this Original Application, it is most respectfully prayed that this
Honourable Tribunal may be pleased TO STAY THE OPERATION OF A-2 CLARIFICATORY ORDER, till the final
outcome of the Original Application .

9. Not Applicable.

10. PARTICULARS OF THE POSTAL ORDER IN RESPECT OF APPLICATION FEE: -


(1) No. Of the Indian Postal Order: 27G 025687
(2) Date of issue of Postal Order : 18.03.2009
(3) Name of issuing Post Office : Maravaneri, Salem-7.
(4) Post Office at which payable : Chennai

12. LIST OF ENCLOSURES: -


(1) Annexures A-1 to A-7
(2) Vakalath.
(3) Envelopes with A/D Cards: 4 Nos.
(4) Postal Order for Rs. 50/-
VERIFICATION
I, M. Subramaniam, aged 41 years, S/o D. Mani, Inspector of Central Excise, Audit Section,
O/o the Commissioner of Central Excise, Anaimedu, Salem 636 001 & residing at 369, Pudu
Erikarai Road, Ayyanar Nagar, REddiyur, Salem 636 004, do hereby verify that the contents from
para 1 to 12 are true to the best of my knowledge and belief and that I have not suppressed any
material facts.

Chennai
20.3.2009

M. SUBRAMANIAM
(APPLICANT)

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT


6

BEFORE THE HON'BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL MADRAS BENCH


O.A. No. OF 2009
M. SUBRAMANIAM : APPLICANT
Vs.
UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS : RESPONDENTS

SYNOPSIS
The applicant, presently working as Inspector of Central Excise has been granted
upgradation of Pay scale to that of the Superintendents as per ACP scheme. As per A-6 resolution
of Government of India, the applicant in the payscale Rs. 7500-12000 are entitled for Rs.4800 as
grade pay and after 4 years of drawing the same, a grade pay of Rs.5400/-. The applicant is to be
provided fixation of pay as per A-6 memo, based on A-3 ACP scheme and A-7 clarification of the
Department.

Aggrieved by the same the applicant approaches this Hon'ble Tribunal for Justice.

Dated this the 20th day of March 2009

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT

(REVISION OF PAY –ACP BENEFITS-CENTRAL EXCISE DEPARTMENT)

BEFORE THE HON'BLE CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL MADRAS BENCH


O.A. No. OF 2009
M. SUBRAMANIAM : APPLICANT
Vs.
UNION OF INDIA & OTHERS : RESPONDENTS

I N D E X
SL. NO. PARTICULARS PAGE NO

Compilation No. I
1) Original Application 1 to 14
2) Annexure A-1: - Truecopy of the Order
Order C.No.II/24/1/2008 Bills-6cpc
dated 16.9.2008 issued by the IVth Respondent. 15 to 16

3) Annexure A-2: Truecopy of the Letter


F. No. 26017/98/2008-Ad.II.A dated 11.2.2009 17 & 18
issued on behalf of the IInd Respondent.

Compilation II
4) Annexure A-3: Truecopy of the
OM No. 35034/1/97-Estt (D) dated 9.8.99
Issued by the Ministry of Personnel.
5) Annexure A-4: -Truecopy of the ACP order No.
116/2003 dated 9.9.2003 issued by the 2nd
respondent.

6) Annexure A-5:- True copy of the ACP Pay fixation


statement dated 11.8.2004 issued by department.

7) Annexure A-6: - True copy of the


resolution No. 1/1/2008-I C. dated 29.8.2008
published in the Gazette of India.
8) Annexure A-7: True copy of the Letter
F. No. A.26017/98/2008-Ad II A dated
21.11.2008 issued on behalf of the 2nd Respondent.

Dated this the 20th day of March 2009

COUNSEL FOR THE APPLICANT


7

For use in the Tribunal Office: -


Date of Filing:
Registration No:
Signature for the Registrar