DEBASISH KAR GUPTA,J. - (1.) Let affidavit of service be kept on record.
(2.) This writ application is directed against a final order dated August 16, 2018 passed by the West Bengal Administrative Tribunal in the original application. The subject matter of challenge in the original application was non consideration of the case of the petitioner for promotion to the post of Divisional Fire Officer in terms of Memorandum No.224-P &AR(Vig) dated June 12, 1980 (hereinafter referred to as the said memorandum). According to the respondent authority, the cause of such non-consideration of the case of the petitioner for promotion was pendency of a disciplinary proceeding against him. The operative portion of the final order, which is impugned to this writ application, is quoted below: In view of our above findings, the respondent no.2, Director General of Fire and Emergency Services, Government of West Bengal is directed to take necessary steps for consideration of promotion to the applicant along with other Station Officers within a period of eight weeks from the date of communication of the order and the recommendation of promotion of the applicant, if any, by the Public Service Commission, West Bengal will be kept in the sealed cover and the same will abide by the result of the disciplinary proceeding pending against the applicant. With the above direction, the original application is disposed of.
(3.) It is submitted by Mr. D.N. Ray, learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner, that the disciplinary proceeding in question has been initiated against the petitioner by virtue of a charge sheet dated May 23, 2014. The disciplinary proceeding is still pending. Drawing our attention towards the said memorandum, it is submitted by him that the said memorandum takes care of the promotion of those in-service candidates to higher posts against whom a disciplinary proceeding has been pending for more than three years provided the delay in disposal of the disciplinary proceeding is due to any dilatory tactics employed by the Government servant concerned or due to proceeding in a Court of law started at the instance of the officer concerned. According to Mr. Ray, the said memorandum prescribes a procedure for passing an order of promotion in the aforesaid cases on provisional basis. It is the contention of Mr. Ray that the method of sealed cover policy for the candidates against whom the disciplinary proceeding is pending has been prescribed in the said memorandum. But the learned Tribunal while accepted the contention of the petitioner, directed the respondent authority, namely, respondent No.2 to take necessary steps for consideration of promotion of the petitioner along with other Station Officers and to keep the result in a sealed cover which should abide by the result of the disciplinary proceeding pending against him.;