(Open Court)

Central Administrative Tribunal Allahabad Bench, Allahabad ****

Original Application No. 1268 of 2025 This the 11^th Day of December, 2025.

HON’BLE MR. RAJNISH KUMAR RAI, MEMBER-J.

HON’BLE MS. MANJU PANDEY, MEMBER-A.

Rishikesh Tiwari a/a 38 years S/o Sri Ram Dayal Tiwari R/o 52/7 Vijay Nagar, District- Kanpur Nagar.

….Applicant.

By Advocate: Mr. Akshay Raghuvanshi/Mr. B.K. Singh Raghuvanshi/Mr. Shivendra Singh.

Versus

1. Union of India through its Secretary Ministry of Defense (Defense Production and Supply) Government of India New Delhi.

2. Director General, Directorate of Ordinance (co-ordination and Supply) 10A S.K. Boss Road Kolkata-700001.

3. General Manager Ordinance Equipment Factory Kanpur.

...Respondents.

By Advocate: Mr. Bablu Singh.

ORDER By Hon’ble Mr. Rajnish Kumar Rai, Member (Judicial)

Mr. Akshay Raghuvanshi, learned counsel for the applicant, and Mr. Bablu Singh, learned counsel for the respondents, are present and heard.

2. The applicant has approached this Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, praying for the following relief(s):-

“(i) Issue an order or direction in the nature of mandamus commanding the Respondents to promote the applicant on the post of Junior Works Manager, which is due since-2021 with consequential benefit.

(ii). Issue any other suitable order of direction, which this Hon'ble Tribunal may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.

(iii). Award cost of this application in favour of applicants.”

3. The brief facts of the case are that the applicant was initially appointed on 07.04.2006 as Tailor and was subsequently promoted through LDCE in 2010 to the post of Chargeman, maintaining an unblemished service record throughout. He became entitled to MACP in 2019 and promotion to Junior Works Manager in 2021, but both were withheld solely due to pendency of a matrimonial criminal case under Section 498A IPC filed in 2018, despite no departmental proceedings ever being initiated. His MACP recommendation and DPC assessment were kept in sealed cover. The applicant repeatedly represented that as per DoPT OMs dated 14.09.1992, 19.01.2017 and 30.08.2022, sealed cover cannot continue indefinitely and adhoc/provisional promotion is permissible, especially when similarly placed employees—such as one Shri Sheo Kumar Singh facing a 302 IPC case—were granted promotion. The criminal case ended in his acquittal on 11.12.2024 and although an appeal has been filed, no stay exists. Despite this, juniors were promoted vide order dated 22.09.2021 while the applicant was denied promotion arbitrarily. He now seeks direction for grant of promotion to JWM w.e.f. 2021 with consequential benefits.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that after the brief facts as noted above, the applicant is presently working on the post of Chargeman and, as per the annual tenure of promotion, he became due for promotion to the post of Junior Works Manager in the year 2021. However, his promotion was withheld only on account of pendency of a criminal case instituted by the wife of the applicant. It is submitted that the said criminal proceedings have now been finally decided by the Trial Court and the applicant has been acquitted vide judgment dated 11.12.2024. Learned counsel submits that once the applicant stands acquitted, he becomes entitled to consideration for promotion strictly in accordance with his seniority and eligibility. He further submits that despite acquittal, the respondents have not taken any action, compelling the applicant to submit a detailed representation dated 08.08.2025 before respondent no. 2, which is still pending consideration. Learned counsel has placed reliance upon the DoPT O.M. dated 19.01.2017, wherein it has been clearly provided that where the recommendations of the DPC have been kept in sealed cover solely due to pendency of a criminal case, the sealed cover may be opened upon acquittal of the Government servant, provided such acquittal has not