The pendency of criminal proceedings should not necessarily bar adhoc promotion, subject to the final outcome of the vigilance case.

JUDGMENT

Biswanath Rath, J. - This writ petition involves the following prayer:

"The petitioner therefore prays that your lordships would graciously be pleased to direct the Opp. Parties to open the sealed cover in which the findings of the DPC dated 11.04.2017 in respect of promotion of petitioner to the post of CSO kept in sealed cover and he shall be promoted to the post of CSO with effect from the date of promotion of his immediate junior with all consequential service and financial benefits in favour of the petitioner by considering Annexrue-7 within a stipulated time.

And pass such order/directions as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper;

And fro this act of kindness, the petitioner as in duty bound shall ever pray."

2. Taking this Court to the pleading in the writ petition Sri Pati, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner's case for promotion being taken up by the Promotion Aadalat, the Promotion Adalat vide Annexure-4, the order dated 7.12.2020 has given a direction for suitable promotion of the petitioner for the prolonged delay in finalization of vigilance case. It is, however, the concerned department taking up such direction of the Promotion Adalat at page 18 observed that for pendency of the vigilance case and also disciplinary proceeding, the consideration of the case of the petitioner for promotion and the result therein kept in sealed cover cannot be opened. Challenging this aspect of the authority, Sri Pati, learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that even assuming that there has been a Criminal proceeding but for the Criminal proceeding since initiated in the year, 2009 is still to be over even after 11 years, further since the petitioner is going to be superannuated in September, 2021, in the event the petitioner is not promoted and ultimately he gets acquitted in the Criminal Proceeding, the suffering of the petitioner due to no promotion given for the time being cannot be compensated in any manner. It is also claimed that the disciplinary proceeding if any, initiated soon after the case of the petitioner is taken for promotion has no relevancy in the matter of promotion of the petitioner taken up in the year, 2017. Further relying on Supreme Court decision in the case of State of Punjab and others Vs. Chamanlal Goyal, reported in (1995) 2 SCC 570, taking aid of the direction of the Hon'ble Supreme Court therein, Sri Pati, learned counsel also attempted to take support of the judgment to the petitioner's case. Petitioner also relied on a judgment/ order of this Court in Division Bench in disposal of W.P.(C). No.3850 of 2018 finds place at Annexure-5 and thus claimed allowing the writ petition on reversal of the impugned order.

3. To the contrary, Sri Dhal, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State pointed out that for the several proceeding involving the petitioner pending, at this stage, no fault can be found with the Disciplinary Authority in keeping the promotion aspect of the petitioner in sealed cover and, therefore, a submission is made in the Court saying until the vigilance proceeding is over, it may not be appropriate to open the sealed cover. Sri Dhal, learned Additional Government Advocate, therefore taking support of the stand of the Disciplinary Authority prayed for dismissal of the writ petition. Sri Dhal, learned Additional Government Advocate however did not dispute that the vigilance case initiated in the year 2009 is yet to be over and that the case filed by the petitioner has application to the case of the petitioner at hand.

4. Considering the rival contentions of the parties, this Court finds undisputedly the case of the petitioner has already been taken up for promotion and the result in the said promotion process involving the petitioner even though not declared, it has been kept in sealed cover subject to outcome in the vigilance proceeding and disciplinary proceeding indicated hereinabove. It is at this stage of the matter, this Court