Exonerated government servants are entitled to notional promotion and financial benefits despite retirement, overriding past disciplinary proceedings.

Judgment :

Biraja Prasanna Satapathy, J.

1. This matter is taken up through Hybrid

2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the Parties.

3. Petitioner has filed the present Writ Petition inter alia challenging the order dtd.22.09.2022 so passed by Opposite Party No.1 under Annexure-1. Vide the said order, claim of the Petitioner to get the benefit of promotion with all consequential service and financial benefits was rejected.

4. It is the case of the Petitioner that, Petitioner while continuing in service as a Class-1 Senior officer, he was not extended with the benefit of promotion on the ground of pendency of both vigilance and departmental proceeding against him. Not only that because of his implication in the vigilance proceeding, he was placed under suspension vide office order dtd.25.02.2010 under Annexure-3. However, subsequently during pendency of both the proceedings, he was reinstated in his services vide office order this Court dtd.24.12.2010 under Annexure-4, where he joined on 14.01.2011.

4.1. It is contended that during pendency of both the proceedings, Petitioner retired from service on attainting the age of superannuation on 29.02.2012 in terms of the order issued under Annexure-5. However, after his retirement from service, Petitioner was acquitted in the vigilance proceeding vide judgment dtd.31.07.2018. Not only that taking into account the acquittal of the Petitioner in the vigilance proceeding, the disciplinary authority- Opposite Party No.1 vide office order dtd.31.01.2019 under Annexure-7, dropped the departmental proceeding initiated against the Petitioner.

4.2. Thereafter, vide another order issued on 02.07.2019 under Annexure-8 the period of suspension from 01.05.2009 to 13.01.2011 was treated as duty. However, it is contended that on the face of such orders passed under Annexures-7 & 8, when Petitioner was not extended with the benefit of promotion nor the financial benefit, Petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.18067 of 2022. This Court vide order dtd.20.07.2022, when directed Opposite Party No.1 to consider the Petitioner’s grievance with regard to extension of the benefit of promotion and the financial benefits as due and admissible, the same was rejected vide the impugned order dtd.22.09.2022 under Annexure-1.

4.3. It is also contended that in view of the office Memorandum issued by the GA & PG Department on 29.05.2020 under Annexure-10, Petitioner is eligible and entitled to get the benefit of promotion. Stipulation contained in the office Memorandum dtd. 29.05.2020 under Annexure-10 reads as follows:-

“Sub:

Promotion of Government Servants against whom disciplinary/criminal proceeding are pending procedure to be followed.

Elaborate provisions have been prescribed under GA. & P.G. Department OM. No. 3926, dated 18.02.1994 read with peragraph 6 of GA. & P.G. Department OM. No. 29699, dated 01.11.1997 for opening of the smaled cover maintained due to pendency of disciplinary proceedings/cominal prosecution against the Government Servants at the time of consideration of their promotion to the next higher grade in the Departmental Promotion Committee.

Instances have come to the notice of the Government that different Administrative Departments have raised doubts as to whether the sealed cover maintained in respect of a Government Servant can be opened after his/her retirement/demise, as the case may be, to give him/her retrospective/posthumous notional promotion to the next higher grade if he/she has been exonerated completely from the charges levelled against him/her in the disciplinary proceedings/criminal prosecution instituted against him/her.

After careful consideration, it has been decided by the Government that where sealed cover procedu