Wazir Sing Vs. Union of India, Ministry of Defence Through the Secretary to Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence, South Block, New Delhi and Others - Court Judgment

SooperKanoon Citationsooperkanoon.com/944593
CourtCentral Administrative Tribunal CAT Chandigarh
Decided OnNov-02-2011
Case NumberOriginal Application No.349/PB/2010
JudgeTHE HONOURABLE MRS. SHYAMA DOGRA, MEMBER (J) & THE HONOURABLE MRS. PROMILLA ISSAR, MEMBER (A)
AppellantWazir Sing
RespondentUnion of India, Ministry of Defence Through the Secretary to Govt. of India, Ministry of Defence, So
Excerpt:
mrs. shyama dogra, member (j): 1. the facts, as projected by the applicant, are that when he was working as clerk with the respondents, he was booked in a criminal case in an offence under section 4 read with section 3 (1) (c) of the official secrets act and section 417 of i.p.c. along with other co-accused. however, vide annexure p-4 dated 29.11.2005, he was acquitted by the sessions court. an appeal filed by the state of rajasthan against the acquittal is still pending in the high court of rajasthan. thus, the contention of the applicant is that since he has been honourably acquitted by the high court, therefore, the respondents may be directed to consider his case for promotion as auditor i.e.01.4.2005 and as senior auditor i.e.30.6.2009 with all the consequential benefits and interest @24%. 2. the respondents have not denied the factual position in the case, however, they submit that since the appeal against the acquittal of the applicant is still pending, therefore, it cannot be said that the orders passed by the sessions court have attained finality unless, some favourable orders are passed by the high court of rajasthan. so far as the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of auditor is concerned, it is submitted by the respondents that on receipt of his application, the dpc proceedings (review cases) were forwarded to the head quarters office for promotion of the applicant to the grade of auditor in july 2007 and his case was also sent to the head-quarters for consideration of his promotion to the auditor’s grade. later, the respondents intimated that the case of sh. wazir singh which has been kept in a ‘sealed cover’ may now be opened and the findings of the dpc kept therein may be furnished to the head-quarters office to consider his case for promotion to the grade of auditor. in view of this, a letter dated 09.8.2007 was issued to release the promotion in respect of the applicant w.e.f. 01.4.2005 but the actual orders were not issued in view of the criminal case pending in the rajasthan high court against his acquittal, and therefore, no relief can be granted to the applicant at this stage as prayed for by him and the o.a. deserves to be dismissed. 3. the applicant has not filed any rejoinder. 4. we have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record. 5. after perusal of the order passed by the trial court in the aforesaid criminal case (annexure p-4), the applicant, along with raghuvir singh, madan lal, papu ram and om parkash, was acquitted as allegations against these five persons were not proved which means that the applicant was honourably acquitted by the trial court. 6. therefore, since on the directions of the head-quarters office, the case of the applicant which had been kept in sealed cover and orders of his promotion were also passed but not communicated to him, we are of the view that the respondents are liable to communicate these orders to the applicant, keeping in view the fact that when an employee is convicted by the trial court in a criminal case, the department is always free to take action against him and pass orders of his dismissal or other penalty is imposed as provided under the rules without waiting for the final outcome in the appeal filed by an employee, if any, in the higher court against his conviction. therefore, on the similar analogy, it has to be followed that where an employee is acquitted by a trial court and appeal against his acquittal is pending in the higher court, he should get the benefit of this acquittal. as the applicant has been acquitted by the trial court, therefore, in view of the factual and legal position as narrated above, the respondents are directed to intimate the final order passed on his promotion which was kept in a sealed cover (but not communicated to him) within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. if the applicant was found fit to be promoted from 2005, the respondents are at liberty to give him consequential benefits as per law and rules along with considering his case for further promotion as per his seniority and eligibility. however, they are also at liberty to take further action against him after the final outcome of the criminal case filed by them, if it is so required, at the relevant point of time. 7. with these observations and directions as above, this o.a. stands disposed of with no order as to costs.
Judgment:

MRS. SHYAMA DOGRA, MEMBER (J):

1. The facts, as projected by the applicant, are that when he was working as Clerk with the respondents, he was booked in a criminal case in an offence under Section 4 read with Section 3 (1) (c) of the Official Secrets Act and Section 417 of I.P.C. along with other co-accused. However, vide Annexure P-4 dated 29.11.2005, he was acquitted by the Sessions Court. An appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan against the acquittal is still pending in the High Court of Rajasthan. Thus, the contention of the applicant is that since he has been honourably acquitted by the High Court, therefore, the respondents may be directed to consider his case for promotion as Auditor i.e.01.4.2005 and as Senior Auditor i.e.30.6.2009 with all the consequential benefits and interest @24%.

2. The respondents have not denied the factual position in the case, However, they submit that since the appeal against the acquittal of the applicant is still pending, therefore, it cannot be said that the orders passed by the Sessions Court have attained finality unless, some favourable orders are passed by the High court of Rajasthan. So far as the case of the applicant for promotion to the post of Auditor is concerned, it is submitted by the respondents that on receipt of his application, the DPC proceedings (Review Cases) were forwarded to the Head Quarters office for promotion of the applicant to the grade of Auditor in July 2007 and his case was also sent to the Head-quarters for consideration of his promotion to the Auditor’s grade. Later, the respondents intimated that the case of Sh. Wazir Singh which has been kept in a ‘Sealed Cover’ may now be opened and the findings of the DPC kept therein may be furnished to the Head-quarters office to consider his case for promotion to the Grade of Auditor. In view of this, a letter dated 09.8.2007 was issued to release the promotion in respect of the applicant w.e.f. 01.4.2005 but the actual orders were not issued in view of the Criminal case pending in the Rajasthan High Court against his acquittal, and therefore, no relief can be granted to the applicant at this stage as prayed for by him and the O.A. deserves to be dismissed.

3. The applicant has not filed any rejoinder.

4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have carefully gone through the record.

5. After perusal of the order passed by the trial Court in the aforesaid Criminal case (Annexure P-4), the applicant, along with Raghuvir Singh, Madan Lal, Papu Ram and Om Parkash, was acquitted as allegations against these five persons were not proved which means that the applicant was honourably acquitted by the trial Court.

6. Therefore, since on the directions of the Head-quarters office, the case of the applicant which had been kept in sealed cover and orders of his promotion were also passed but not communicated to him, we are of the view that the respondents are liable to communicate these orders to the applicant, keeping in view the fact that when an employee is convicted by the trial Court in a criminal case, the department is always free to take action against him and pass orders of his dismissal or other penalty is imposed as provided under the Rules without waiting for the final outcome in the appeal filed by an employee, if any, in the higher Court against his conviction. Therefore, on the similar analogy, it has to be followed that where an employee is acquitted by a trial Court and appeal against his acquittal is pending in the Higher Court, he should get the benefit of this acquittal. As the applicant has been acquitted by the trial court, therefore, in view of the factual and legal position as narrated above, the respondents are directed to intimate the final order passed on his promotion which was kept in a sealed cover (but not communicated to him) within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. If the applicant was found fit to be promoted from 2005, the respondents are at liberty to give him consequential benefits as per law and rules along with considering his case for further promotion as per his seniority and eligibility. However, they are also at liberty to take further action against him after the final outcome of the criminal case filed by them, if it is so required, at the relevant point of time.

7. With these observations and directions as above, this O.A. stands disposed of with no order as to costs.