Promotion to Charge-sheeted officer - When there is no Charge-sheet on relevant date, para 7 of OM dated 14.09.1992 has no application: SC
UNION of India is in appeal against the order of the High Court allowing the promotion to an employee of Railways. The grievance of the officer was that on the date when his juniors were promoted, there was no charge-sheet against him and therefore para 2 and 7 of the DOPT OM dated 14.09.2012 ( Sealed cover procedure) has no application.
On behalf of UOI, it was contended that the High Court is not justified in considering paragraph 2 of the memorandum alone. At the relevant time, 4 charge sheets were issued to the respondent and enquiries were completed and notices to show cause had already been served upon the respondent. On the other hand, the respondent submitted that as on the date i.e. 21.04.2003, when his juniors were promoted, neither the respondent was under suspension nor any charge sheet was served upon him and he was not facing any criminal prosecution, hence, there was no impediment in promoting him.
After hearing both side, the Supreme Court held:
As per paragraph 2 of the said memorandum, at the time of consideration of the Government servants for promotion, the following details of Government servants in the consideration zone for promotion falling in the categories mentioned should be specifically brought to the notice of the DPC, viz., (i) Government servant is under suspension; (ii) Government servant has been served with a charge sheet and the disciplinary proceedings are pending; and (iii) Government servant is facing prosecution for a criminal charge and the said proceedings are pending. As rightly observed by the High Court, if the above conditions are available, even one of them, then the DPC has to apply the ‘sealed cover process'. In the case on hand, it is not in dispute that the relevant date is 21.04.2003, when the respondent's batch mates were promoted, admittedly on that date the respondent was not under suspension, no charge sheet was served upon him nor he was facing any criminal prosecution. In such circumstances, in terms of paragraph 2 referred to above, the recommendation of the DPC has to be honoured and there is no question of applying ‘sealed cover process'.