JUDGMENT

The delay is condoned and special leave is granted.

2. The respondent is a postman. He appeared at the required test for the purpose of promotion to the Postal Assistants cadre. He was successful at the test but before the order for his promotion could be issued he was found guilty in a disciplinary proceeding, and was punished by withholding of increment in salary for a period of one year and six months. As a result of this penalty the decision to promote him was not implemented. He made an application before the Central Administrative Tribunal for a direction to the present appellants to promote him. Following the decision in Parveen Kumar Aggarwal v. Indian Council of Agricultural Research, (1985) 8 Admn. Tri. Cas 496, and another unreported judgment, the Tribunal allowed his prayer holding that he was entitled to be promoted with effect from 1-12-1989 with consequential benefits and directed the appellants to promote him without delay, on the ground that the denial of promotion to the respondent amounts to a second punishment which is not permissible. This judgment is under appeal.

3. The learned Counsel for the appellants has relied on the provisions of Rule 157 of the P