SURINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WHAT is the stage and situation of sealed cover procedure to be followed by the Departmental Promotion Committee is the issue arising for consideration in this case.

(2.) THE petitioner is aggrieved since he is denied promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer under the first respondent. While working as Junior Engineer in the feeder category, he was placed under suspension, pending inquiry. That was in the year 2004. Thereafter, the departmental proceedings were completed and the petitioner was exonerated in the said proceedings and he was reinstated in service also. On 14.3.2008, DPC met for preparation of select list. However, taking note of the fact that a criminal case was pending in respect of the very same allegations before the Special Judge, Dharamshala, a sealed cover procedure was adopted. According to the petitioner as on 14.3.2008 and even as on today, no charge has been framed against the petitioner. Hence it is submitted that the sealed cover is liable to be opened and in case the petitioner is otherwise suitable and eligible, he is to be promoted.

(3.) LEARNED Senior Additional Advocate General submits that in view of the pendency of the criminal case before the Special Judge, unless the criminal case is finally disposed of, the sealed cover cannot be opened. We are afraid, that contention cannot be appreciated. As on the date of OPC namely 14.3.2008, the petitioner was not under suspension and no disciplinary proceedings were pending. No charge, in any case, has been framed in any criminal Court and thus, the petitioner was not facing a trial in respect of any charge framed in a criminal case pending before the criminal Court. Merely because challan has been filed, the Rules do not contemplate the sealed cover to be kept as such. The third limb of paragraph 2 of the Office Memorandum, as extracted above, makes it clear that a Government Servant in respect of whom prescription for criminal charge is pending, alone is to be subjected to the procedure of sealed cover. In other words, if as on the date of the OPC, no charge had been framed against an incumbent by a criminal Court and such a case was pending before the criminal Court, the incumbent was liable to be considered, in case he is otherwise suitable and meritorious, in view of the position as reflected in the Office Memorandum, as extracted above, regarding the stage of the pendency of the criminal case namely the stage of prosecution being the post -charge.