1993 (4) TMI 340

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....against him for imposition of major penalty had been taken by the competent authority earlier, on 20.11.1989. The decision to initiate disciplinary proceedings was taken on the basis of the First Information Report (F.I.R.) registered on 30.9.1988 by the Central Bureau of Investigation (C.B.I) which was received by the concerned departmental authorities on 31.5.1989. Even though the decision was so taken on 20.11.1989 on the basis of the F.I.R. made such earlier, the chargesheet was actually issued to the respondent on 1.8.1990. The respondent challenged before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Principal Bench, New Delhi, the action of the D.P.C. to follow the sealed cover procedure in his case. The Tribunal has accepted the respondent&#....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nitiate a disciplinary proceedings or steps are taken for launching a criminal prosecution against the government servant, he cannot be given the promotion, unless exonerated, even if the government servant is recommended for promotion by the D.P.C., being found suitable otherwise. in a case like the present, where the First Information Report was registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation, and on that basis the decision had been taken by the competent authority to initiate disciplinary proceedings for imposition of major penalty on the respondent prior to the meeting of the D.P.C., the applicability of the sealed cover procedure cannot be doubted. The formulation of the charges required for implementing the decision of the competent....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cover procedure, are undoubtedly very material to adjudge the suitability of a person for promotion to a higher post. A decision to follow the sealed cover procedure in these circumstances cannot, therefore, be faulted. 5. It is unnecessary in the present case to discuss at length the decision in Jankiraman to indicate its inapplicability to the respondent, since it has been done in the recent decision in Civil Appeal No 1240 of 1993 - Delhi Development Authority v. H.C. Khurana pronounced on April 7, 1993. 6. We may also advert to another aspect of that case. In para 2 of the Office Memorandum No. 22011/2/86-Estt. (A) dated 12.1.1988 issued by the Department of Personnel & Training, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensio....