Subsequent Declaration Of Juvenility Does Not Vitiate Conviction On Merits: Supreme Court Borrowers Cannot Ignore Bank Accounting Systems And Suspense Accounts To Claim Arbitrary Reductions In Loan Dues: Supreme Court Re-employed Judicial Officers Cannot Claim 6th Pay Commission Scales: Supreme Court Supreme Court Slams High Court For Erroneously Exercising Review Jurisdiction On 'Mistaken Notion', Restores Employee's ACP Benefits Trademark Infringement: Defendant Can Cross-Examine Plaintiff On Use Of Brand Name Even If Written Statement Is Not On Record: Supreme Court 'Interest And Welfare Of Child Would Be Best Served': Supreme Court Invokes Parens Patriae In Contempt Plea; Revokes Own Custody Order Mere Absence From MCA Records Cannot Absolve Accused Under Section 138 NI Act If Prima Facie Role Is Shown: Punjab & Haryana High Court Incomplete Or Defective Real Estate Application Cannot Claim Deemed Registration Under Section 5(2) Of RERA Act: Orissa High Court Mere Criminal Antecedents Cannot Justify Invoking 'Organized Crime' Offence Under Section 111 BNS Without Fulfilling Statutory Ingredients: Madhya Pradesh High Court 'Testator's Character & Prior Gifts Justify Unequal Distribution': Madras High Court Upholds Holographic Will Minority Status Cannot Arrest Limitation Period For Appeal If Minor Was Represented By Natural Guardian In Original Proceedings: Madhya Pradesh High Court Mere Admission Of Property Boundaries In Family Partition Deeds Destroys Coparceners' Claim That Land Remains Joint Ancestral Property: Karnataka High Court Mesne Profits Must Reflect Open Market Letting Value Rather Than Static Contractual Rates: Delhi High Court Law Graduates Who Fail To Clear AIBE Within Two Years Cannot Practice In Any Court, Tribunal Or Revenue Authority: Allahabad High Court Bombay High Court Slams 'Growing Tendency' To Bypass GST Appeals, Says 'Natural Justice' Not A Blanket Excuse For Writ Petitions Proportionate Cost Only Can Be Awarded On Decreed Amount, Not On Total Plaint Valuation: Kerala High Court

Himachal Pradesh High Court Rules Sealed Cover Procedure Misapplied in Promotion Case: Petitioner Entitled to Due Promotion

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Himachal Pradesh High Court, bench presided by Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J., declared that the adoption of the sealed cover procedure in the case of Naresh Kumar, who was being considered for promotion to the post of Assistant Engineer (Civil), was unjustified. The court held that the sealed cover procedure can only be utilized after the issuance of a charge-memo or charge-sheet and not during the preliminary investigation stage.

The case (CWP No.8244 of 2022) revolved around Naresh Kumar, who had been appointed as Junior Engineer (Civil) in the H.P. Public Works Department and was being considered for promotion to the higher post. However, his promotion was put on hold due to a pending criminal case against him in the Court of learned Special Judge, Kullu, related to FIR No.2/2013. The FIR was registered under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act at Police Station State Vigilance & Anti-Corruption Bureau Keylong, District Lahaul & Spiti.

The court's judgment clarified that the sealed cover procedure can only be resorted to after a charge-memo or charge-sheet is issued, not during the preliminary investigation phase. The Hon'ble Apex Court's precedent in Union of India and others v. K.V. Jankiraman and others, (1991) 4 SCC 109 was cited, concurring with the view that the adoption of the sealed cover procedure before the charge-sheet stage is not justified.

In the case at hand, no charge-sheet had been filed against Naresh Kumar, and the Investigating Officer confirmed his non-involvement through a closure report submitted to the learned Special Judge. The court deemed the application of the sealed cover procedure by the respondents as improper and ruled in favor of the petitioner.

In light of the judgment, the court directed the respondents to open the sealed cover and, if Naresh Kumar is found eligible for promotion, all consequential benefits should be granted to him from the due date. The authorities were instructed to complete this process within four weeks from the date of the judgment.

Date of Decision: 13.07.2023

Naresh Kumar vs State of H.P. and others 

Latest Legal News