Entitlement to Notional Seniority, Promotion, and Pay Parity with Batchmates Irrespective of Joining Date.

The applicant, an Inspector (Excise GST & Central Excise) in the Mumbai Zone, was appointed based on the results of the Combined Graduate Level Examination (CGLE) 2011/2012.

He filed the present Original Application seeking notional seniority and pay parity with his batchmates from the CGLE-2011 (RY-2012), irrespective of his actual date of joining, citing several judicial precedents including Amit Khatri vs. Union of India.

During the pendency of the matter, the respondents initiated restorative actions, including the revision of the seniority list and the issuance of a promotion order to the grade of Superintendent.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to notional seniority and pay fixation at par with his batchmates of CGLE-2011 (RY-2012) despite a later date of joining.

2. Whether the prayers in the OA have been rendered infructuous in light of subsequent administrative orders passed by the respondents during the litigation.

Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, regarding the jurisdiction of the Tribunal to redress grievances related to recruitment and conditions of service.

Principles of "notional seniority" and "pay parity" as established in precedents such as Amit Khatri vs. Union of India (O.A. No. 757/2022) and Priyanka Vs. Union of India (O.A. No. 504/2022), which mandate that candidates delayed in joining due to administrative reasons or revised results should not be deprived of seniority benefits relative to their batch.

The Tribunal observed that the Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs (CBIC) had already approved the grant of notional seniority to the applicant via communication dated 14.07.2025 and subsequently approved the grant of promotion and pay allowances at par with his batchmates on 04.09.2025.

The court noted that a revised draft seniority list was issued on 17.07.2025, and an Establishment Order (E.O. No. 136/2025) was passed on 17.10.2025, promoting the applicant to Superintendent notionally w.e.f. 01.01.2020.

While the seniority and promotion aspects were settled, the respondents admitted that the grant of notional pay and arrears was still "under process".

Consequently, the Tribunal found that while the substantive grievances were addressed, a formal direction was necessary to ensure the completion of the financial arrears process.

The Tribunal directed the respondents to complete the remaining exercise regarding the grant of notional pay and arrears in accordance with the Board's directions within three months.

The OA was disposed of as having been rendered partially infructuous but with a specific mandate for the timely completion of the pay-related benefits.