ORDER :

Sanjay Kumar Medhi, J.

1. Heard Shri UK Nair, learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Shri SS Roy, learned State Counsel, Assam for the official respondents.

2. Considering the subject matter and also the fact that pleadings have been exchanged, this writ petition is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.

3. The petitioner is aggrieved by not promoting him to the rank of ACS Senior Grade-II w.e.f. 31.12.2015 and to the subsequent higher grades with effect from the date when his contemporaries/juniors were promoted and also by the notification dated 22.01.2020 whereby he has been given promotion to the cadre of ACS Senior Grade-II with prospective effect.

4. The petitioner is an ACS Officer. While discharging his duty, the petitioner was arraigned as an accused in Diphu PS Case No. 119/2015 whereupon the petitioner was placed under suspension w.e.f. 02.07.2015. After completion of the investigation, a final report was submitted in which the petitioner was discharged. As regards the disciplinary proceeding, after the development in the investigation and the criminal case, the charges levelled against him in the disciplinary proceedings were also dropped and the period of suspension was treated to be on duty for all purpose and accordingly, the petitioner was reinstated in service.

5. In the meantime, the promotional exercise was conducted in which the contemporaries and juniors of the petitioner were considered and promoted to the rank of ACS Senior Grade-II and to subsequent higher posts. However, due to the pendency of the criminal case as well as disciplinary proceeding, the case of the petitioner was put in a 'Sealed Cover'. After the aforesaid development wherein the petitioner was exonerated of all the charges, both in the criminal case as well as in the departmental proceeding, the case of the petitioner was taken up for consideration and it was found that the Karbi Anglong Autonomous Council (KAAC) under which the petitioner was serving did not submit the Annual Confidential Reports (ACR) for the period 2011-12, 2012-13, 2013-14 and 2014-15 and it is for that reason that the promotion could not be granted. Subsequently, vide a notification dated 22.01.2020, the petitioner has been promoted to the rank of ACS Senior Grade-II, however, with prospective effect only. The petitioner contends that because of no fault of his, he has been denied his promotion from the date when his contemporaries/juniors were promoted to the higher rank and consequently to the other promotional exercise carried out thereafter.

6. The learned Senior Counsel, Shri Nair has contended that it is not a case where the petitioner has been acquitted on the benefit of doubt after the trial and the records would reveal that even materials could not be gathered to frame a charge against the petitioner in the investigation itself. The disciplinary proceedings were also dropped and the petitioner was exonerated of all the allegations. Under such facts and circumstances, to deny the petitioner the benefit of promotion from the initial date would amount to grave injustice.

7. In support of his submissions, Shri Nair has relied upon a decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India Vs. Jankiraman, reported in AIR 1991 SC 2010. The learned Senior Counsel has submitted that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in an unequivocal terms has laid down that when an employee is completely exonerated and is not visited with the penalty even of censure, he has to be given the benefit of the salary of the higher post along with other benefits from the date on which he would have normally been promoted but for the disciplinary/criminal proceedings. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has, however, given a caveat that the cases would be different where the delay in the disciplinary or criminal case is at the instance of the employee or the acquittal in the criminal proceeding is with benefit of doubt or on account of non-availability of evidence due to t