SAMRENDRA SINGH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS application has been filed for issuance of a writ in the nature of certiorari for quashing the order dated 8th January, 2007 passed by the Patna Bench of Central Administrative Tribunal in O.A. No. 447 of 2004, whereby application filed by the petitioner has been dismissed.

(2.) PETITIONER happens to be an Inspector in the Central Excise and Customs Department. A criminal case was registered against him and a report to that effect was forwarded to the Magistrate by the Central Bureau of Investigation on 15.3.1996. Allegation against him is of acquisition of property disproportionate to the known source of income. The competent Government granted sanction for his prosecution by order dated 3.11.1999. Petitioner 'smatter for grant of promotion under Assured Career Progression Scheme was considered by the Departmental Promotion Committee in its meeting held on 10.11.1999 and it decided to keep his matter of promotion in sealed cover. Thereafter, the Central Bureau of Investigation submitted chargesheet against the petitioner on 4.12.1999 and it is common ground that the case is pending for trial. He filed representation questioning his non -promotion. Said representation was rejected by order dated 28.2.2000. Petitioner approached the Tribunal by filing O.A. No. 310 of 2000. The Tribunal directed the respondents to consider the petitioner 'scase in the light of its order passed in O.A. No. 641 of 1997. In the light of the aforesaid order the case of the petitioner was considered in the review meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee. It found that earlier on 10.11.1999, the Departmental Promotion Committee had decided to keep the petitioner 'scase in sealed cover since the competent authority had granted sanction for prosecution earlier on 3.11.1999. Accordingly by order dated 9.12.2003 petitioner 'srepresentation was rejected.

(3.) MR . Gautam Bose, Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the petitioner, contends that in the Assured Career Progression Scheme there is no provision for keeping the matter of promotion under sealed cover on the ground of pendency of criminal proceeding. He points out that the ordinary rule of keeping the result in sealed cover in case of regular promotion due to pendency of criminal case does not apply in the case of promotion under the Assured Career Progression Scheme. Mr. Rakesh Kumar Singh, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Union of India, however, submits that as the criminal case was pending against the petitioner, respondents rightly resorted to the sealed cover procedure.