LexSMT. SUDHA SHRIVASTAVA versus THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
••
•
SMT. SUDHA SHRIVASTAVA
A
v.
THE COMPTROLLER AND AUDITOR GENERAL OF INDIA
NOVEMBER 8, 1995
[KULDIP SINGH, S. SAGHIR AHMAD AND B.N. KIRPAL, JJ.)
B
Service Law :
Legal heir of a civil servant-Right to continue proceedings before Court
on death of government servant and to claim retrospective promotion and C
consequential monetary benefits to him-Member of Indian Audit & Ac-
counts Service (Class- !}-Prosecution of under Prevention of Corruption
Act-Meanwhile officer considered for promotion and sealed cover procedure
adopted-Officer dying during pendency of appeal against conviction--Legal
. heir permitted to continue proceedings-{]/timately conviction set asid~
Legal heir's claim for retrospective promotion and consequential monetary D
benefits to deceased rejected by Government and Central Administrative
Tribunal, Held, right to get benefits due to a government servant would
devolve on his legal heir if during the pendency of proceedings such govern-
ment servant expired-Sealed cover procedure having been followed, right to
be considered for promotion stood established-Respondent to open sealed E
cover and to proceed accordingly.
The husband of the appellant was a member of the Indian Audit and
Account Services (Class l). He was prosecuted under the Prevention of
Corruption Act 1972 in 1969 and was convicted by the Trial Court. He
preferred an appeal before the High Court. During the pendency of the F
appeal he died in October 1981, and his wife, the appellant, was permitted
to be substituted in the proceedings. The appeal was ultimately allowed
and the conviction and sentence were set aside .
The appellant thereafter made .-epresentations to the Government G
claiming retrospective promotion and consequential benefits to her hus-
band. Her case was that her husband was due for promotion to the post
of Accountant General (Grade-II) in the pay scale of Rs. 2250-2500 in
October, 1973 but because of the pendency of criminal case against him
the "sealed cover" procedure was followed. She also claimed that the
deceased would have become entitled to further promotion to the post of H
797
798
. SUPREME COURT REPORTS [1995) SUPP. 4 S.C.R.
A Accountant General (Grade-I), in the pay scale of Rs. 2500-2750, in Oc·
....
tober, 1981. Her claim was rejected. She then filed an application before
the Central Administrative Tribunal, which dismissed the application
holding that the right for enforcement of promotion accrued only on the
acqnittal of appellant's husband and since he died before such acquittal,
B his personal right of enforcement of promotion did not actually accrue
and, therefore, nothing survived to his legal heirs. Aggrieved, the appellant
filed the appeal by special leave.
On the question: whether the heir of a civil servant who was
.,
prosecuted in a Court of law but was ultimately acquitted, though by that
c time he had died, can be permitted to continue the proceedings before the
Court and claim the grant of retrospective promotion to the deceased and
the consequential monetary benefits.
Allowing the appeal, this Conrt
D
HELD : 1.1. The right to get the benefits, which would have been due
to the appellant's deceased husband as a result of the "sealed cover
procedure", would devolve on the appellant in the same way as a legal
representative of a deceased workman has a right to claim back wages or
any other monetary relief which would have ensued to such deceased
E workman. [804-E]
1.2. The effect of the acquittal of the appellant's husband must be
regarded as if he bad been wrongly convicted. He, therefore, would have had
a right to have been placed in the higher scale of pay, if he had been selected
for promotion and this is a right which would devolve on the legal heirs, if
F
during the pendency of the proceedings, the said employee expired. [803·F]
Rameshwar Manjhi v. Management of Sangramgarh Colliery, [1994] 1
~CC 292, relied on.
"'•
G
2.1 The Tribunal fell in error inasmuch as the process for promotion
to the post of Accountant General (Grade-II), regarding appellant's hus-
band had already been undertaken and the "sealed cover" procedure
followed. Whatever the rights he had, as a result of this "sealed cover" the
procedure having been followed stood established as on that date. Along
with the right to work in the higher post, if he was to be promoted, he
H would have also got a right to salary in the higher scale. [803-D-E]
..
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.