Aquittal mandates opening sealed cover for promotion consideration per DoPT guidelines.

The applicant, Anupam Mahalanabish, currently an Additional Assistant Director, was considered for promotion to Assistant Commissioner of Customs and Indirect Taxes by a Departmental Promotional Committee (DPC) meeting held on January 11, 2023

Although within the zone of consideration, the DPC's recommendations for the applicant were kept in a "sealed cover" due to pending judicial proceedings against him

Other officers from the feeder cadre were promoted on an ad-hoc basis via an order dated January 13, 2023, but the applicant's name was not included

The applicant submitted a representation on January 23, 2023, seeking promotion

The applicant subsequently informed the Tribunal that he had been acquitted in both judicial proceedings pending against him, producing copies of the orders from the Ld. Judicial Magistrate, 4th Court, Alipore (BGR Case No. 1915 of 2015, dated January 14, 2026) and 7th Court, Alipore (BGR Case No. 3479 of 2015, dated March 6, 2025)

Whether the sealed cover containing the recommendations of the DPC concerning the applicant for promotion should be opened following his acquittal in the pending judicial proceedings

Whether the applicant is entitled to promotion to the grade of Assistant Commissioner of Customs and Indirect Taxes and consequential benefits upon the opening of the sealed cover

The court primarily applied the Office Memorandum dated September 14, 1992, issued by the Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Government of India

This O.M. outlines the procedure for promoting government servants against whom disciplinary or court proceedings are pending, specifically detailing that DPC recommendations are to be kept in a "sealed cover" if prosecution for criminal charges is pending

It further stipulates that upon conclusion of the disciplinary case or criminal prosecution resulting in the dropping of allegations or complete exoneration, the sealed cover "shall be opened," and the officer's promotion is to be determined with reference to the position assigned in the sealed cover

The court noted that the DPC's recommendation for the applicant was kept in a "sealed cover" because judicial proceedings were pending against him, in accordance with the DoPT Office Memorandum dated September 14, 1992

The applicant demonstrated, through court orders, that he had been acquitted in both pending judicial proceedings

The court found that a "plain reading" of these acquittal orders indicated the applicant's innocence

Therefore, applying the DoPT O.M. (supra), which mandates the opening of the sealed cover upon exoneration or dropping of allegations, the court determined that the competent respondent authority was obligated to open the sealed cover and consider the applicant's promotion and consequential benefits

The court’s reasoning directly followed the prescribed procedure in the DoPT memorandum, linking the factual outcome of the judicial proceedings (acquittal) to the legal obligation of opening the sealed cover.

The Original Application was disposed of without any order as to costs