Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, F H Shaikh, filed a Special Civil Application under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a direction to the State of Gujarat and its authorities to consider his case for promotion based on the recommendations of the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) meetings held on 08.03.1996 and 30.11.1996. The petitioner was employed under the respondent authorities and was eligible for promotion, but his case was not considered due to two pending disciplinary enquiries. One enquiry resulted in his exoneration on 29.06.1998, and the other led to a penalty of stoppage of one increment with future effect, which was challenged by the petitioner in Special Civil Application No. 8490 of 2010. The High Court, vide judgment dated 11.02.2026, quashed and set aside the penalty order. During the pendency of the present petition, the petitioner retired from service. The learned advocate for the petitioner argued that since both enquiries have been resolved in his favor, there is no reason to deny him promotion. The learned AGP for the State could not controvert these facts. The Court observed that the respondent could have adopted the sealed cover procedure for promotion when enquiries were pending, but since the petitioner has been exonerated, the denial of promotion is no longer justified. The Court directed the respondent authorities to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order, in accordance with law, and if found eligible, to grant consequential benefits. The petition was allowed accordingly.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Promotion - Consideration after Exoneration - The petitioner was denied promotion due to two pending disciplinary enquiries; one resulted in exoneration and the other in a penalty which was later quashed by the High Court. The Court held that since no enquiry is pending and the petitioner has been exonerated, the State must consider his case for promotion as per the DPC decisions of 1996. (Paras 1-6) B) Service Law - Sealed Cover Procedure - Applicability - The Court noted that the respondent could have adopted the sealed cover procedure for promotion when enquiries were pending, but since the petitioner has been exonerated, the denial of promotion is no longer justified. (Para 6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioner is entitled to consideration for promotion after being exonerated in disciplinary enquiries that were pending at the time of DPC meetings.
Final Decision
The petition is allowed. The respondent authorities are directed to consider the case of the petitioner for promotion within eight weeks from the date of receipt of the order, in accordance with law, and if found eligible, to grant consequential benefits.
Law Points
- Promotion cannot be denied solely due to pendency of disciplinary enquiry if employee is subsequently exonerated
- Sealed cover procedure for promotion when enquiry is pending
- Right to consideration for promotion even after retirement
