Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:4104-DB Court No. - 1 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 808 of 2025 Petitioner :- U.O.I.Thru. Secy. Ministry Of Defence Deptt. Of Defence Production New Delhi And 3 Others Respondent :- Rakesh Singh Counsel for Petitioner :- Varun Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- In Person Hon'ble Attau Rahman Masoodi,J. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners-Union of India and the respondent who appears in person. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioners-Union of India has assailed the judgment and order dated 4.7.2024 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal in Original Application No. 332/00294/2024 wherein the following directions have been issued by the tribunal. "9. In view of above, OA is disposed of in the following terms : (i) Impugned order dated 8.5.2024 is quashed. (ii) Respondents/Competent Authority is directed to consider promotion of the applicant for second promotional scale as per rules and provide consequential benefits accordingly. (iii) The said exercise shall be completed within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. (iv) It is clarified that from the date of first promotion till the proposed date of second promotion, if anything is adverse against the applicant except above private criminal case (arising out of matrimonial dispute with applicant and his wife under Section 498A, 504, 506 and 323 of IPC), then that may be taken into consideration while considering the case of the applicant". 3. On a close scrutiny of the material placed on record, it is gathered that on the previous occasion as well, though the candidature of the respondent herein was considered for promotion but the benefit thereof was not accorded on account of pendency of the criminal case initiated by the estranged wife of the respondent which was unrelated to his official duty. The order passed by this Court on the previous occasion according to the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee have duly been honored and acted upon. 4. In the present case, however, though the respondent- employee was eligible for consideration for higher promotion, however the very right of his consideration was denied on account of the pendency of the criminal case which on the previous occasion was not allowed to come in the way of his substantive rights. 5. Denial of right of consideration being it a fundamental right has rightly been disapproved by the tribunal in the judgment impugned herein this writ petion. The tribunal having appreciated the position of law in the light of the factual background has issued the aforementioned directions which do not suffer from any illegality. 6. Learned counsel for the petitioners-Union of India conceded that except the notification dated 14.9.1992 there is no bar coming in the way of right of consideration of the respondent. 7. Needless to say that in the case at hand there is no criminal proceeding initiated by the department for any act on the part of the respondent-employee enabling denial of such a right. The family dispute between the respondent and his wife is the only impediment on the basis of which the respondent's right of consideration for higher promotion was curtailed and is sought to be justified on the premise of the aforesaid office memorandum. The tribunal has duly adverted to the office memorandum mentioned above and the opinion formed by the tribunal, in our humble consideration, does not suffer from any illegality. 8. Being in agreement with the observation and directions issued by the tribunal, we do not find it a fit case for interference in exercise of the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 9. The writ petion being bereft of merit is accordingly dismissed. (Subhash Vidyarthi, J.) (Attau Rahman Masoodi, J.) Order Date :- 22.1.2025 kanhaiya Digitally signed by :- KANHAIYA KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench