• Opening of sealed cover withholding promotion

It is respectfully stated that Clause 3.1 of Office Memorandum No.22011/4 /91-Estt.(A) of 14th Sept., 1992 of Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Department of Personnel & Training reproduced hereunder is not reasonable  & justified for censured employee. 
“3.1 If any penalty is imposed on the Government servant as a result of the disciplinary proceedings or if he is found guilty in the criminal prosecution against him, the findings of the sealed cover/covers shall not be acted upon. His case for promotion may be considered by the next DPC in the normal course and having regard to the penalty imposed on him.” 
Since penalty of “Censure” does not have any currency & the employee also considered for promotion, the sealed cover of the employee having awarded penalty of “Censure” may be opened. If there is delay in replying or award of penalty, employee will be victim of the above rule. This may be explained by the following example: Let two employees who were under the zone of consideration for promotion on 01.01.14 were served with chargesheet on 10.12.13 to reply in defence within one month. One of the employee submitted his replies on 20.12.13 & the Disciplinary authority awarded him a penalty of “Censure” before 01.01.14. DPC considers him to be promoted to next higher grade since “Censure” does not have any currency period. The other employee submits his reply on 02.01.14 was also censured by the Disciplinary authority. However his candidature which will be in sealed cover will not be acted upon his case for promotion may be considered by the next DPC. as per Clause 3.1 of the above Office Memorandum. Will there will not be injustice in later case? 
I was also awarded a penalty of Censure. However in compliance to Para 3.1 of above Office Memorandum the sealed cover was not opened despite the fact that there are so many instances where an employee having awarded penalty of Censure prior to DPC have been promoted. 
The example cited above  clearly proves that the rule itself is discriminatory and violates article 20 of the constitution of India since a double penalty i.e. (i) Minor penalty of censure and (ii) withholding of promotion is imposed  to one of the candidate and also violates article 14 and 16 of the constitution of India since   quantum of punishment is different for same type of penalty.
May kindly apprise that I have to proceed court of law for justice or there is any other alternative left behind for redressal of my grievance.
Asked 2 years ago in Labour from Jammu, Jammu and Kashmir
Hi,
 You should file a write in the high court if  you have been treated differently and the procedures/actions taken by the higher officers were discriminatory and violation  of your fundamental rights.
Thresiamma G. Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1316 Answers
85 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Hello,
In my opinion you do not have any option other than moving the court of law for a redressal of your grievances.
The differential treatment that is meted out to you while consigering the next level promotion can be  brought to the attention of the concerned authority in writing and see if any remedial action is taken.
If that does not help then you need to seek court's intervention to get a directive issued to the authorities concerned  to get your rights duly recognised as are eligible for promotion.
S J Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1949 Answers
65 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
1. Immediately file a Writ Petition before the High Court alongwith all the evidence praying for relief,

2. Writ Court disposes matters fast simply based on evidence submitted.
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
12043 Answers
228 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
File immediately a writ in the high court.
S.P. Srivastava
Advocate, New Delhi
703 Answers
13 Consultations
4.8 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
Ask a Lawyer

Labour Lawyers

Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
12043 Answers
228 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Thresiamma G. Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1316 Answers
85 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
S J Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1949 Answers
65 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Shashidhar S. Sastry
Advocate, Bangalore
1233 Answers
59 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
H. S. Thukral
Advocate, New Delhi
514 Answers
125 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
B.T. Ravi
Advocate, Bangalore
733 Answers
29 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Saptarshi Banerjee
Advocate, Kolkata
183 Answers
4 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Advocate Buvaneswari
Advocate, Chennai
24 Answers
12 Consultations
4.4 on 5.0
Rajinder Kumar
Advocate, New Delhi
68 Answers
4 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Rajni Sinha
Advocate, Mumbai
273 Answers
25 Consultations
4.8 on 5.0