Central Administrative Tribunal - Delhi
Mrs. Sumathi Ravichandran vs Union Of India on 5 April, 2011
Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench OA No.392/2010 New Delhi this the 5th day of April, 2011 Honble Mr. Justice V.K. Bali, Chairman, Honble Mr. L.K. Joshi, Vice Chairman (J) Mrs. Sumathi Ravichandran, Age 48 years, W/o Shri R.Ravichandran, R/o T-2, Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-110001 -Applicant (By Advocate: Shri S.K. Gupta) -V E R S U S- 1. Union of India, Through Secretary, Department of Post, Dak Bhawan, Sansad Marg, New Delhi-01 2. Secretary, Union Public Service Commission, Dholpur House, Sahajha Road, New Delhi-01 -Respondents. (By Advocates: Shri Rajesh Katyal and Mrs. Alka Sharma) O R D E R (Oral)
Justice V.K. Bali:
The applicant has been ignored for promotion to the Senior Administrative Grade twice when DPC met on 16.1.2009 and 20.7.2009.
2. In the present OA filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, her claim is to give effect to the promotion from the date persons junior to her were promoted on 11.2.2010 pursuant to the DPC that was held on 27.10.2009. Applicant stakes no claim for promotion as per DPC which met on 16.1.2009.
3. We need not give facts in detail. Suffice it to mention that admittedly, when the DPC met on 27.10.2009, the applicant was neither under suspension nor a charge had been framed against her under Section 240 Cr.PC as regards case of corruption pending against her. None of the circumstances under which the case of the applicant could be put under sealed cover were in existence. There may have been some dispute with regard to applicability of OM dated 14.12.2007 or 7.7.2008 when the matter came up before us on the last date of hearing, but as on today, there is no dispute that the OM that should be applicable would be dated 14.9.1992. OM dated 25.10.2009 is only a reiteration of OM dated 14.9.1992. The OM referred to above of the year 1992 came into being after decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India & Ors. Vs. K.V. Jankiraman & Ors., AIR 1991 SC 2010. We are conscious of the fact that the applicant is involved in three corruption cases but concededly, in none of the cases aforesaid, the charge under Section 13(1) and 13(1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, has been framed against the applicant. The applicant was not under suspension nor any departmental inquiry was pending against him at all. In OA No. 1919/2008, decided on 11.8.2009, we have observed as follows:-
6. Before we may part with this order, we may mention that in Om Prakash (supra), the applicant therein was facing criminal charge, which also included allegations constituting offences under Section 13(2) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. We may also mention that the law makes no distinction between ordinary delinquency or misconduct like corruption. The Government may think to deal separately with the misconduct which may be serious enough like bribery and corruption, but as long as there is no distinction made on the gravity of the offence for an employee may be charge-sheeted, the courts shall have no choice but for to take the view as has been taken by us.
4. Once there is no distinction as regards seriousness of the criminal case against an employee, the case of the applicant for promotion could not be put under sealed cover. The applicant in the DPC held on 27.10.2009 was, in fact, not even considered, least putting her case under sealed cover. No criminal charge has been framed against the applicant till date. Surely, it was not framed on the date when persons junior to the applicant were promoted on 11.2.2010.
5. In the facts and circumstances as mentioned above, we direct the respondents to convene a review DPC to consider the case of the applicant for promotion to the SAG. If the applicant is found fit on the basis of her service record, she shall be promoted with effect from the date her juniors were promoted, with all consequential benefits. Let the exercise ordained above be completed within eight weeks from today. OA is disposed of. No costs.
(L.K. Joshi) (V.K. Bali) Vice Chairman (A) Chairman /lg/