CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH LUCKNOW ORIGINAL APPLICATION No. 332/00395 of 2024 Dated, this 12th day of November, 2025 Hon’ble Mr. Justice Anil Kumar Ojha, Member- Judicial Hon’ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative Abhijat Srivastava, aged about 39 years, S/o Sri Ajay Prakash, R/o

53-B, Karbala, District Prayagraj.

….. Applicant By Advocate: Shri Yogi Sharma VERSUS

1. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Finance, North Block, New Delhi.

2. Revenue Secretary, Department of Revenue, North Block, Ministry of Finance, New Delhi.

3. Chairman, Central Board of Indirect Taxes & Customs, Department of Revenue, New Delhi.

4. Principal Chief Commissioner, CGST & C. Excise, Lucknow Zone 7-

A, Ashok Marg, Lucknow.

5. Principal Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise Apratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.

6. Shri K.P. Singh Principal Commissioner, CGST & Central Excise, Aparatyaksh Kar Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.

7. Swapan Kumar Srivastava, Assistant Commissioner/Inquiry Officer Division-II, CGST & Central Excise, Apratyaksh Kar Bhawan, Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow.

8. Assistant Commissioner Vigilance, Office of Principal Chief Commissioner Central Goods & Service Tax & Service Excise GST Bhawan, Ashok Marg, Lucknow.

…...Respondents By Advocate: Smt. Prayagmati Gupta

ORDER (ORAL)

Per Hon’ble Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Member-Administrative In this case relating to removal from service, the applicant has sought following reliefs:

“(1). Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to set aside the impugned order of removal dated 12.03.2024 issued by the respondent no. 2 contained in Annexure No. 1 to this Original Application.

(2) Hon’ble Tribunal may graciously be pleased to direct the respondents no. 2 to 4 to reinstate the applicant on the post of Inspector on which he was working on the date of passing of impugned order dated 12.03.2024 with consequential benefits.

(3) Issue any other order or directions which this Hon’bel Tribunal may deem fit and proper under the circumstances of the case and (4) Allow the Original Application with costs.”

2. The applicant was working on the post of Inspector in Group-B cadre in the Department of Central Goods and Service Tax & Central Excise. He was proceeded against departmentally with the issue of memorandum of charge dated 08.08.2023 under rule 14 of the Central Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1965 [CCS (CCA) Rules, hereafter] and, after enquiry, removed from service vide order dated 12.03.2024. Aggrieved, the applicant has preferred this OA.

3. The applicant states that while serving as Inspector under the respondents he was also elected as the General Secretary of Inspectors’ Association of Indirect Taxes & Customs, Lucknow Circle and he raised bona fide grievances about the illegal actions of the authorities, but he has been proceeded against unjustifiably, the enquiry has been conducted in a prejudiced and biased manner, and the disciplinary authority has passed the impugned order of removal from service in an arbitrary and illegal manner. The applicant contends that although there is alternative remedy of appeal in the present case and he has filed an appeal, the alternative remedy is not being exhausted as the result is already known to him like past appeals, and that alternative remedy is not absolute bar in the event of order without jurisdiction and in violation of principle of natural justice and both these exceptions are available in this case.

4. Per contra, the respondents state that due process of law as well as procedure has been followed while conducting the disciplinary proceedings. The respondents contend that the applicant had filed an appeal before the appellate authority against the impugned order dated

12.03.2024 and the same is pending decision.

5. We have heard both the parties. Learned counsel for the applicant highlighted judgment and order of Hon’ble High Court in Roshan Lal vs State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors