JUDGMENT

Rajiv Sahai Endlaw, J. - On 15th September, 2020 when this petition first came up before us, the following order was passed:

"3. The petitioner, an Assistant Sub-Inspector (ASI) in the respondents Central Reserve Police Force (CRPF), has filed this petition pleading, (i) that he joined CRPF as a Constable (GD) on 2nd April, 1990 and in July, 2002 was promoted as Head Constable (GD); (ii) with effect from 1st April, 2011, the rank of ASI was introduced in the CRPF and in the list published on 2nd March, 2012 for promotion to the post of ASI (GD), the name of the petitioner was included; (iii) on 31st May, 2012, the petitioner was imposed a punishment of withholding of one increment without cumulative effect and resultantly the increment due on 1st July, 2012 was not given to the petitioner and the promotion of the petitioner to the rank of ASI was also cancelled till 30th May, 2013; (iv) the petitioner, though on 1st July, 2013 was given a double pay increment for the years 2012 and 2013 but the promotion due to the petitioner was not released even after 30th May, 2013; (v) on 26th November, 2013, the petitioner was informed that he will be considered for promotion after five years from the date of his punishment; (vi) that the rules for promotion to Sub-Inspector (SI)/ASI require completion of minimum of five years of service in the rank of Head Constable, completion of Weapons and Tactics Course, completion of a Senior Under Officers Cadre Course (SUOCC), no adverse report in the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) in the preceding five years and no major punishment in the preceding five years; (vii) the respondents CRPF, in the letter dated 26th November, 2013, when informed the petitioner that he will be considered for promotion after five years, assumed the punishment meted out to the petitioner to be a major punishment when as per the Rules, the punishment of withholding of increment for one year without cumulative effect is a minor punishment; (viii) though the petitioner, on 23rd September, 2019 has been promoted as ASI (GD), but not w.e.f. 30th May, 2013; and, (ix) that owing to the delayed promotions as ASI (GD), the petitioner has also been left behind in the matter of promotion to SI (GD), to which rank his batch-mates have been promoted.

4. The cause of action, if any, accrued to the petitioner, as per the averments in the petition, when the petitioner was not promoted after 30th May, 2013 i.e. more than seven years back and the petition is highly belated.

5. The counsel for the petitioner however states that the cause of action accrued on 23rd September, 2019 when the petitioner was promoted as ASI (GD).

6. We are however not able to comprehend. The grievance of the petitioner is not promotion as ASI (GD) but nonpromotion as ASI (GD) on 30th May, 2013.

7. We have enquired from the counsel for the petitioner, that when the petitioner himself, at page 17 of the petition, has pleaded one of the eligibility conditions for promotion as ''no adverse remarks in the ACR for preceding five years'', whether not the punishment meted out to the petitioner on 31st May, 2012, and which on enquiry is stated to be pertaining to indiscipline of the year 2012, resulted in adverse remarks in the ACR, and the petitioner became eligible for promotion only with effect from expiry of five years from the year 2013 and whether not the same makes the stand of the respondents CRPF, of finding the petitioner to be not entitled to promotion till the year 2018, correct.

8. The counsel for the petitioner then states that the ACR records may be called for.

9. Though the counsel for the respondents CRPF appears on advance notice but is unable to confirm whether the punishment, even if a minor one under the Rules, resulted in adverse remarks in the ACR.

10. It also requires consideration, whether the purpose of the Rule making the withholding of increment without cumulative effect a minor punishment is defeated, by treating it to be an advers