UNION OF INDIA Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The grievance of the Union of India (Department of Telecommunication) as a writ petitioner, against the impugned judgment of the Tribunal dated 11.2.2000, is that the said impugned judgment goes totally contrary to the latest pronouncement of the Apex Court reported as UOI v. R.S. Sharma, V (2000) SLT 107=JT 2000 (4) SC 649. The Tribunal in the impugned judgment had proceeded upon the earlier view of the Apex Court as laid down in UOI v. K.V. Janakiraman, 1991 (4) SCC 109, for returning the finding that since upto the date of the promotion order dated 27.3.1994 no charge memo had been served on the private respondent in the present case in the course of any departmental inquiry, nor was he charge-sheeted in the CBI case till that time as such the said order has to be given effect to within a period of two months from the impugned judgment of the Tribunal along with consequential benefits.

(2.) In the latest decision of the Apex Court in R.S. Sharma's case (supra), the earlier view as laid down in K.V. Janakiraman's case (supra) was reconsidered in the light of paragraph 7 of the "Sealed Cover Procedure" adopted by the Govt. of India (vide Government of India, Deptt of Per. & Tng., Office Memo No. 22011/2/86- Estt. (A) dated the 12th January, 1988).

(3.) It has been held that where an individual has not been actually promoted, and where, as in the present case, in the meanwhile formal sanction has been accorded to prosecute him in that case, as per interpretation of paragraph 7 of the Sealed Cover Procedure as laid down in R.S. Sharma's case the implementation of the recommendations has to await till his being completely exonerated of all the charges.