Promotion eligibility requires a clean service record; disciplinary proceedings may affect consideration regardless of prior assessments.

ORDER

(Pronounced by Hon'ble Mr. Varun Sindhu Kul Kaumudi, Member(A))

This OA has been filed by the applicant seeking the following relief :-

“A. ....the OA may kindly be allowed with a direction to the respondents to promote the applicant from 01.04.2018, the original date when he was due for promotion from ACIT to DCIT, with all consequential benefits;

B. Any other appropriate writ, order or direction, which may be considered just and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, may be issued in favour of the applicant.”

2. In the order, dt. 23.01.2020, this Tribunal had cited the orders passed on 17.12.2019, 19.12.2019 and 09.01.2020, relevant portions of which are extracted below :-

“

......

“19.12.2019 CVS(MA)

........

In this matter the prayer is for consideration of the applicant for promotion with effect from 01.04.2018. The subsequent DPC held on 31.12.2018 has apparently put the case of the applicant in a sealed cover on the basis of administrative report dated 23.10.2018. Applicant has submitted that the original date of promotion is 01.04.2018 and no matter was pending against him. Therefore the Review DPC only has to consider the facts and circumstances lying at the time of the original DPC. .........

.......

2. But even after one year has elapsed since the matter was taken up, no reply is seen filed. The Board has seriously erred in this matter. We hold them responsible for this situation and since there is no reply even after the matter was first taken up on 28.02.2019 and almost a year has elapsed, there is no way other than for us to grant the order. OA is therefore allowed. The benefits to be made available to the applicant within 2 weeks next. No cost.”

3. While closing the C.P. No. 30/2019 on the 3^rd August, 2022, it was observed that,

“ At the very outset, Shri N Amaresh, learned counsel for the respondents, stated that the order dated 23.01.2020 passed by this Tribunal in Original Application No.251/2019 has already become the subject matter of challenge before the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in Writ Petition No.9419/2022, wherein while issuing notices, an interim stay has also been granted against the order dated 23.01.2020 passed by this Tribunal.

2. The fact as stated by Shri Amaresh has not been disputed by Shri T C Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner.

3. In view of the above, the Contempt Petition is closed with liberty to the petitioner to get the same revived in the eventuality of the dismissal of the aforesaid writ petition by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka.”

4. The order of the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka, issued on 09.10.2023, in WP No. 9419/2022, is extracted below :-

“ 3. We have perused the impugned order.

4. CAT has noticed that since there was no reply by Union of India, there was no other way other than to grant the order. Thus, the impugned order is based on the default on the part of Union of India.

5. In that view of the matter, this matter needs to be heard on merits before CAT. In the result, the following:

i) Writ petition is allowed.

ii) Order dated 23.01.2020 is set aside.

iii) The matter is remanded to CAT with a request to permit the Union of India to file statement of objections.

iv) Learned Advocate for petitioners undertakes to file statement of objections on first date of hearing.

…….”

5. Thus, the matter is once again before this Tribunal.

6. The facts of the case, as submitted by the Applicant, are given below, in brief:-

The applicant was posted as Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax in Bangalore. He retired from service on 30.9.2019. The applicant was due for promotion from the post of Asstt. Commissioner to that of Deputy Commissioner from 1.4.2018, when his ju