Second Appeal is Not a Forum for Rehearing or Reassessment of Evidence: Andhra Pradesh High Court Dismisses Partition Suit Appeal Failure of Justice Must Be Proved, Not Assumed: Calcutta High Court Upholds Murder Conviction Despite Charge Framing Lapse Bail is the Rule, Refusal is an Exception – Right to Liberty Cannot Be Ignored: Delhi High Court Grants Bail to Ivory Coast National in NDPS Case Courts Must Adopt a Justice-Oriented Approach in Matrimonial Cases: Gauhati High Court Condones Delay in Family Court Appeal FIR Quashing | Breath Analyzer Test Alone Cannot Prove Alcohol Consumption: Patna High Court Quashes FIR Under Bihar Prohibition Law Unregistered Writing Cannot Confer Ownership: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Partition Dispute Allegations of Stalking and Criminal Intimidation Must Be Tested at Trial: Gujarat High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Bombay High Court Quashes Criminal Case Against Nestlé Officials Over Maggi Noodles Controversy No Shortcuts in NDPS Investigations – J&K High Court Rebukes Casual Approach of Investigating Officers Sessions Court Cannot Order Re-Investigation: Allahabad High Court Quashes Direction Against Jaypee Hospital If Official Witnesses Are Reliable, Independent Corroboration Is Not a Must:  Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds NDPS Conviction No Service Tax Can Be Levied on Sale of Lottery Tickets: Supreme Court Rules That Lottery Distributors Are Not Agents Courts Cannot Be Silent Spectators When Justice Is Denied Due to Procedural Errors:  Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Recall of Bail Rejection Order Section 27 of the Evidence Act Requires Independent Corroboration—Mere Claims by Police Are Not Enough: Supreme Court on Flawed Investigation Confession to Police Is No Confession in Law: Supreme Court Acquits Man, Citing Inadmissibility of Statements Made in Custody Mere 'Last Seen Together' Is Not Enough for Conviction Unless It Forms a Complete Chain of Circumstantial Evidence: Supreme Court Sets Aside Life Sentence in 16-Year-Old Girl’s Murder Failure to Explain Wife’s Death Strengthens Guilt Under Section 106 of Evidence Act" – Supreme Court Restores Conviction in Murder Case Child Witness Testimony Cannot Be Discarded Solely on Grounds of Tutoring: Supreme Court Restores Conviction in Murder Case

High Court of Orissa Sets Aside Orders Granting Promotion During Pendency of Criminal Cases Against Government Servants

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Cutack, May 11, 2023: The High Court of Orissa delivered a significant judgment today in a batch of writ appeals, wherein it addressed the issue of granting promotions to government servants during the pendency of criminal cases against them. The order, numbered 11 and dated May 11, 2023, sets aside the orders of the learned Single Judge that directed the State of Odisha to grant promotions subject to the outcome of the criminal proceedings.

The court considered a common question that arose in all the appeals, namely, whether government servants could be granted ad hoc or regular promotions while criminal cases against them were still pending. It noted that the criminal cases were at various stages in the Court of the Special Judge (Vigilance) and that departmental proceedings were also pending in some cases.

The court observed that except in one appeal, the impugned orders were passed by the learned Single Judge on the first date of hearing without allowing the State of Odisha to file its reply. After hearing the arguments of the parties, the court examined various Office Memoranda (OMs) and Notifications issued by the Government of Odisha, which did not permit or envisage promotions during the pendency of criminal cases involving government servants.

Referring to legal precedents, including judgments of the Supreme Court, the court held that government servants do not have a right to be considered for promotion during the pendency of departmental or criminal proceedings. The plea for granting ad hoc promotions to the respondents was also rejected by the court, as it found no legal basis for such a request.

The court clarified that if a government servant is acquitted in the criminal proceedings and exonerated in the departmental proceedings, the notional benefits of the promotion due to the employee will be calculated, and the pension will be fixed accordingly. It further noted that the respondents could request the criminal courts to expedite the proceedings and bring the trials to an early conclusion.

Consequently, the court set aside the impugned orders of the learned Single Judge, as they directed the State of Odisha to grant promotions to the respondents subject to the outcome of the criminal cases. The writ appeals were allowed, and no costs were imposed.

This judgment has significant implications for the promotion policies concerning government servants facing criminal charges in the state of Odisha. The court's ruling clarifies the legal position that promotions cannot be granted during the pendency of criminal cases, emphasizing the importance of completing the criminal proceedings and departmental proceedings before considering promotions.

May 11, 2023:

State of Odisha and Another   vs Joseph Barik

Similar News