Sealed cover procedure requires a formal charge memo or charge sheet before promotion can be withheld.

Sealed cover consideration is permissible only after disciplinary proceedings are formally instituted through a charge memo, or after a criminal case reaches the stage of a charge sheet. Mere allegations, investigation, preliminary inquiry, or pending complaint are not enough. On the facts noted, no departmental charge memo had been issued, no criminal charge sheet had been filed, and the employee had not been suspended, so withholding promotion through sealed cover was unjustified. The tribunal's direction to open the sealed cover and grant consequential promotion relief was affirmed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the sealed cover procedure could be adopted where no departmental charge memo had been issued and no criminal charge sheet had been filed; (ii) Whether the respondent was entitled to opening of the sealed cover and consequential promotion in light of the governing principles on sealed cover consideration.

Issue (i): Whether the sealed cover procedure could be adopted where no departmental charge memo had been issued and no criminal charge sheet had been filed.

Analysis: The governing rule permits resort to the sealed cover procedure only after initiation of disciplinary or criminal proceedings at the relevant stage, namely issuance of a charge memo in departmental proceedings or a charge sheet in criminal prosecution. Mere pendency of allegations, investigation, or preliminary inquiry is insufficient. The material on record showed that no departmental charge memo had been issued, no criminal charge sheet had been filed, and the employee had not been suspended. The departmental action itself had also been kept in abeyance.

Conclusion: The sealed cover procedure was not justified.

Issue (ii): Whether the respondent was entitled to opening of the sealed cover and consequential promotion in light of the governing principles on sealed cover consideration.

Analysis: The controlling principles require that adverse material must have ripened into a formally instituted disciplinary or criminal proceeding before promotion can be deferred by sealed cover. The cited precedents relied upon for the contrary position turned on materially different facts, including issuance of charge sheets or completed disciplinary action. On the present facts, the preconditions for withholding promotion were absent, and the tribunal's direction to open the sealed cover and grant consequential relief was consistent with the settled law.

Conclusion: The respondent was entitled to opening of the sealed cover and consequential promotion benefits.

Final Conclusion: The challenge to the tribunal's order failed, and the directions for opening the sealed cover and granting consequential promotion-related relief stood affirmed.

Ratio Decidendi: Sealed cover consideration cannot be invoked merely because allegations are serious or investigation is pending; it becomes permissible only after a charge memo in departmental proceedings or a charge sheet in criminal prosecution has been issued, or where disciplinary action has otherwise lawfully reached the relevant stage.

---