9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Consideration of sealed cover by Departmental Promotion Committee. 2. Benefit of promotion based on DPC recommendations. 3. Reconsideration of previous judgments by the Supreme Court. 4. Right to be considered by DPC as a fundamental right under Article 16. 5. Effect of disciplinary inquiry findings on promotion. Analysis: 1. The case involves the consideration of the sealed cover by the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for promotion of an individual despite the pendency of a disciplinary case. 2. The respondent-writ petitioner sought the benefit of promotion as per the recommendation of the DPC, even though a disciplinary case was pending. The High Court accepted the petitioner's contention based on previous judgments of the Supreme Court. 3. The Additional Solicitor General argued for the reconsideration of the previous judgments of the Supreme Court. However, after due consideration, the Supreme Court found no need for reconsideration and agreed with the previous decisions. 4. The Supreme Court emphasized that the right to be considered by the DPC is a fundamental right guaranteed under Article 16 of the Constitution of India, provided the individual is eligible and within the zone of consideration. 5. The findings of the Disciplinary Enquiry exonerating the officer must be given effect to, as they relate back to the date on which the charges were framed. If the disciplinary inquiry ends in favor of the officer, it is as if the officer had not been subjected to any disciplinary inquiry. The sealed cover procedure is designed to give the benefit of any favorable assessment made by the DPC to the officer, even if another disciplinary inquiry is initiated later. The Supreme Court dismissed the Special Leave petition, upholding the decision of the High Court to grant the benefit of promotion to the writ petitioner based on the DPC recommendations. The Court clarified that there was no need to remand the matter back to the High Court for reconsideration as the issue of the correctness of the previous judgments had been addressed and settled. The judgment reaffirmed the importance of upholding the fundamental right of individuals to be considered for promotion by the DPC and the significance of honoring favorable findings of disciplinary inquiries in such cases.
|
