( 1 ) SPECIAL leave granted.

( 2 ) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment dated 24/2/1993, passed by the M. P. State Administrative tribunal, Jabalpur bench, in OA No. 2402 of 1992 (hereinafter referred to as "the tribunal" ).

( 3 ) THE respondent is employed as Executive Engineer in the Public Works Department of the government of Madhya Pradesh. Departmental proceedings were initiated against him on charges of misconduct. During the pendency of those proceedings. Departmental Promotion Committee (hereinafter referred to as "the DPC") considered the case of the respondent for promotion to the higher post of Superintending Engineer. In view of the pendency of departmental proceedings against the respondent, the recommendations of the DPC as regards the respondent were placed in a sealed cover. In the departmental proceedings, minor penalty of censure was imposed on the respondent. Thereafter, the respondent filed an application (OA No. 2402 of 1992 before the tribunal wherein he sought the relief that the sealed cover containing the recommendations of the DPC should be opened and the recommendations of the DPC be given effect to. The said application of the respondent has been allowed by the tribunal by the impugned order. The tribunal has directed that the sealed cover be opened and that appropriate orders be issued in accordance with the recommendations of the DPC and the question whether the respondent should be promoted retrospectively or otherwise should be considered on the basis of the recommendations of the DPC.

( 4 ) SHRI S. K. Agnihotri, the learned counsel appearing for the appellants, has submitted that the tribunal was in error indirecting opening of the sealed cover in the facts of this case. In this context, Shri Agnihotri has invited our attention to the circular dated 2/5/1990 which contains the guidelines in the matter of giving effect to the minor punishment of censure about the promotion of government servants. A translated version of the said circular has been filed on behalf of the appellants. Clauses (i) and (;i) of the said circular are reproduced hereunder:" (I) Vide letter dated 31/1/1964, this has been directed that in the cases of those officers against whom either departmental enquiry is pending or who have been suspended on the recommendations of the DPC should be kept in the sealed cover and that should be opened only when the delinquent officer has been fully exonerated by the departmental enquiry otherwise it should not be opened. The meaning of this is very clear that if the delinquent employee has been punished by the departmental enquiry then his case which has been kept in the sealed cover will not be opened and he will not be granted promotion on the basis of the recommendations of the DPC which is kept in the sealed cover. Hence once the punishment has been granted, the delinquent employee is not entitled for the promotion irrespective of the nature of the punishment. (ii) In the letter dated 27/2/1975, this direction has been explained in more detail. In this letter, it has been explained that till that time the delinquent officer who has been punished by the departmental enquiry will not be considered or will not be considered eligible for promotion to the next post. Regarding those government employees who have been awarded minor punishment, it would not be proper to delete their names from the subsequent DPC on this ground that they have been punished. The cases of such government employees who have been awarded minor penalties should be kept before the subsequent DPC for promotion. It means that the minor penalty will not disentitle the delinquent officer from promotion on the basis of the recommendation of the subsequent DPC. If on the basis of the previous documents and valuation of the DPC, it is necessary to promote any officer who has been awarded with minor punishment then in that case it would be proper to promote the said officer with prospective effect and the promotio