Judgment-

KIRPAL

( 1 ) LEAVE granted.

( 2 ) THE only question which arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the heir of a civil servant who was prosecuted in a Court of law but was ultimately acquitted, though by that time he had died, can be permitted to continue the proceedings before the Court and claim the grant of retrospective promotion to the deceased and the consequential monetary benefits.

( 3 ) THE husband of the appellant, S. S. Shrivastava was a member of the Indian Audit and Accounts Services (Class-I ). During the period 1964-69, he was working as a Financial Adviser to the River Valley Project Department under the State of Bihar. After the general elections of 1969, a Commission of Enquiry was set-up to enquire into the alleged misdeeds of some of the Ministers in the erstwhile Government. After the receipt of the report, the said S. S. Shrivastava along with the concerned minister and the Chief Administrator of the River Valley Project was prosecuted under the Prevention of Corruption Act. The Special Judge convicted S. S. Shrivastava and sentenced him to simple imprisonment of two years and a fine of Rs. 10,000. 00. An appeal was preferred by S. S. Shrivastava, but during the pendency of the appeal before the High Court of Patna, he expired. On an application being made, the appellant as late Shri, S. S. Shrivastavas heir was permitted to be substituted in the proceedings. Ultimately, by judgment dated 13-4-1983, the said appeal was allowed and the conviction and sentence were set aside.

( 4 ) THE appellant, thereafter sent representations to the State claiming retrospective promotion and consequential benefits to her husband, but by order dated 10-7-1987, the said claims were rejected.

( 5 ) THE appellant, thereafter filed proceedings before the central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench, Patna. The case of the appellant was that her husband was due for promotion to the post of Accountant General (Grade-II) in October, 1973 and to that of Accountant General (Grade-I) in October, 1981 and he would have been so promoted but for the criminal proceedings and, as such, it is only just and proper that such promotions be sanctioned and the monetary value of the same be paid to the appellant.

( 6 ) THE respondent contested the application. Apart from raising the plea that the said application was barred by time, it was also contended that the same was not maintainable as the claim of service was purely personal to the appellants husband and no sum could be paid on the basis of deemed promotion to the appellant. During the pendency of the proceedings, the respondent had agreed to an order dated 29-6-1984, being passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, whereby, as a special case, an amount of Rs. 90,000. 00 was allowed to the appellant towards the expenses incurred by the deceased in connection with the criminal proceedings.

( 7 ) WITH regards to the merits of the claim, the case of the respondent, before the Tribunal, was that the deceased had been considered for promotion to the post of Accountant General (Grade-II) in October, 1973, but as his conduct was under investigation before the Court of law, "sealed cover" procedure was followed and if he had been alive when the judgment of acquittal was pronounced, only then, the could have had the benefit of the seniority and fixation of pay, on notional basis, but even he would not have been entitled to the arrears of pay. The other claim with regard to the encashment of leave was refuted by the respondent with the contention that no earned leave was there to the credit of the appellants husband and the leave taken by him for defending the criminal proceedings could not be encashed.

( 8 ) THE Tribunal rejected the application of the appellant by holding that the right for enforcement of promotion accrued only on the acquittal of the appellants husband and as before such acquittal he had died, then this personal right of enforcement of promotion did not ac