The “sealed cover procedure” is adopted when an employee is due for promotion, increment etc. but disciplinary/criminal proceedings are pending against him at the relevant time and hence the findings of his entitlement to the benefit are kept in a sealed cover to be opened after the proceedings in question are over. Hence, the relevance and importance of the questions.

Whether there is any departmental disciplinary proceedings or any case in a Court of law pending against the individual under consideration, or there is a prima facie case on the basis of which a decision has been taken to proceed against the official either departmentally or in a Court of law. The facts may be brought to the notice of the Departmental Promotion Committee who may then assess the suitability of the official(s) for promotion to the next grade/post and for the purpose of this assessment, the D.P.C. shall not take into consideration the fact of the pending case(s) against the official.

In case an official is found “unfit for promotion” on the basis of his record, without taking into consideration, the case(s) pending against him, the findings of the D.P.C. shall be recorded in the proceedings. In respect of any other kind of assessment, the grading awarded by the D.P.C. may be kept in a sealed cover.

After the findings are kept in a sealed cover by the Departmental Promotion Committee subsequent D.P.Cs., if any, held after the first D.P.C. during the period the disciplinary/Court proceedings may be pending, will also consider the officer’s case and record their findings which will again be kept in sealed cover in the above manner.

In the normal course, on the conclusion of the disciplinary/Court proceedings, the sealed cover or covers may be opened, and in case the officer is completely exonerated i.e. no statutory penalty, including that of censure, is imposed, the earliest possible date of his promotion but for the pendency of the disciplinary/Court proceedings against him may be determined with reference to the position(s) assigned to him in the findings in the sealed cover/covers and with reference to the date of promotion of his next junior on the basis of such position.

The officer concerned may then be promoted, if necessary by reverting the junior-most officiating person, and he may be given a notional promotion from the date he would have been promoted, as determined in the manner indicated above. But no arrears of pay shall be payable to him for the period of notional promotion preceding the date of actual promotion.

If any penalty is imposed on the officer as a result of the disciplinary proceedings or if he is found guilty in the Court proceedings against him, the findings in the sealed cover/covers shall not be acted upon. The officer’s case for promotion may be considered in the usual manner by the next D.P.C. which meets in the normal course after the conclusion of the disciplinary/Court proceedings.

The existing instructions provide that in a case where departmental disciplinary proceedings have been held under the relevant disciplinary rules, “warning” should not be issued as a result of such proceedings. If it is found as a result of the proceedings that some blame attaches to the officer, then the penalty of censure at least should be imposed. This may be kept in view so that no occasion arises for any doubt on, the point whether or not an officer has been completely exonerated from disciplinary proceedings held against him.

Reference

Union of India v. K.V. Jankiraman (1991)