MUMBAI, November 11: Drivers employed with the Central Excise and Customs Commissionerate in Mumbai are up in arms against what they describe as ``an arbitrary and irrational promotion policy'' in the department.

According to V D Kharat, president of the Central Excise and Customs Commissionerate Class III Drivers' Association, many drivers employed under the Group `C' in the department have post-graduate degrees in Commerce, Arts, Science and Law and are adequately qualified for the promotion to the post of an inspector. ``However, they are not even allowed to appear in the departmental exams for promotion,'' he said.

The association had earlier moved the Mumbai bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) on the issue, but their applications were dismissed by a combined order dated April 11, 1997.

The CAT had upheld the department's view that Upper Division Clerks, stenographers, women searchers and others, who were placed in the same group as that of drivers, rightly deserved promotions as they worked hand-in-hand with inspectors and also got themselves acquainted with various laws governing the Central Excise and Customs. The drivers, on the other hand, participated in preventive duties always under the supervision of inspectors and were not entitled for promotions, the CAT ruled.

Challenging the above order, the association has filed a writ petition in the Bombay High Court against the Chairman, Central Board of Excise and Customs and the Union Finance Secretary (Department of Revenue).

It is contended in the petition that CAT has committed a gross error of law by refusing the petitioners necessary reliefs by dismissing their plea.

The drivers who perform executive duties like inspectors are not appointed merely to transport officers, but are an integral part of the preventive and anti-smuggling machinery. They also have a role to play in intelligence gathering. While they are deprived of promotions, other staffers inlcuded in Group C, who perform ministerial jobs are entitled to promotions. Even a group D employee can rise up to the post of Assistant Commissioner, but drivers in Group C above them remain stagnant due to the denial of promotions, the petition contended.

However, in an application filed before the CAT earlier, and decided on June 26, 1991, the respondents were directed to consider the drivers' demands without relaxing the eligibility criteria for the test.

But instead of complying with the directions, the respondents introduced two higher grades in the drivers' category.

``This amounted to the violation of fundamental rights of equality and equal opportunity and hostile discrimination against drivers.

"Stepping up on a higher grade for some monetary benefits on the existing post is not the same as achieving a higher status through promotion,'' the petition maintained.

The petitioners have relied upon a Supreme Court judgement which ruled, ``An organisation, public or private, does not merely hire a hand, but employs an individual. An organisation that fails to develop a satisfactory procedure for promotion is bound to pay a severe penalty in terms of administrative costs.''

Copyright © 1997 Indian Express Newspapers (Bombay) Ltd.