The 'sealed cover procedure' and relevant Supreme Court judgments establish that an employee acquitted in a criminal case is entitled to promotion and benefits from the date of promotion as if no proceedings were initiated against them.

Judgment

Mr. Vikas Bahl, J.

This is a Civil Writ Petition filed under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India for the issuance of a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the respondent to open the sealed cover with respect to recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 10.12.2015 (Annexure P-6) and to consider the candidature of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer w.e.f. 22.12.2015 in view of the fact that vide judgment dated 14.03.2018 (Annexure P-8) passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, the petitioner has been acquitted in FIR No.126 dated 17.06.2003. Further prayer has been made for directing the respondent Department to consider the petitioner’s candidature for further promotion to the post of Chief Engineer w.e.f. 30.04.2018 i.e. the date from which his juniors have been promoted to the said post.

2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was appointed as a Sub Divisional Officer/Engineer on 22.09.1982 and has referred to the Appointment Letter (Annexure P-1) to buttress the same. It is further submitted that while working as a Sub Divisional Officer, an FIR No.126 dated 17.06.2003 under Sections 406, 409, 120-B of IPC and Sections 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 came to be registered against the petitioner as well as other employees of the respondent Department at Police Station Sadar Malout. It is also submitted that during the pendency of the said FIR, the petitioner became eligible for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer and since challan had not been filed, the petitioner was promoted as Executive Engineer vide order dated 26.04.2007 (Annexure P-2). It is submitted that the challan/report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was filed on 17.12.2013 and thereafter, the respondent authorities decided to fill up 25 vacant posts of Superintending Engineer by way of promotion and for the said purpose, a Departmental Promotion Committee was proposed to be constituted. It is contended that the post of Superintending Engineer was governed by the Punjab Irrigation Department (Group-A) Service Rules, 2004 (hereinafter to be referred as “The Service Rules, 2004”) and reference has been made to Appendix ‘B’ of the said Rules annexed as Annexure P-4 (at page 56 of the paper book) to highlight the fact that for the purpose of Superintending Engineer, 100% post(s) are to be filled up by way of promotion from amongst the Executive Engineer(s). It is submitted that as per these Rules, the Executive Engineers became eligible for promotion to the post of Superintending Engineer after possessing a minimum of six years of experience as such and consideration for promotion was on seniority-cum-merit basis. It is also submitted that as per the Agenda for the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee, which has been annexed as Annexure P-5 with the paper book, the petitioner was shown to be at Serial No.9 and several persons including Harminder Singh and Ashwani Kumar were shown to be juniors to the petitioner. It is also submitted that in the said document (Annexure P-5), reference was made with respect to the fact that an FIR against the petitioner was pending and that challan/report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. had been presented.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that as per the minutes of the meeting of the Departmental Promotion Committee dated 10.12.2015, the petitioner was shown at Sr. No.10 and against the name of the petitioner, the factum with respect to an FIR having been registered and the report/challan under Section 173 Cr.P.C. having been presented was noticed and thus, it was observed that the Committee had recommended to keep its recommendation(s) in a sealed cover whereas the persons junior to the petitioner including Harminder Singh and Ashwani Kumar at Sr. Nos.12 and 13 were shown to be eligible for promotion and vide order dated 22.1