RBE No. 211/1988: Promotion of Group ‘D’ & Group ‘C’ Railway Servants – Sealed Cover Procedure

No.E(D&A)88 RG6-21, dated 21.09.1988

Sub: Promotion of Railway servants who are under suspension or against whom departmental proceedings/ prosecutions have been initiated or are proposed to be initiated or whose conduct is under investigation – Procedure and guidelines to be followed – Cases of promotions of Group ‘D’ & Group ‘C’ Railway servants.

1. In supersession of earlier instructions on the subject referred to Bd’s letters No.E(D&A)71 RG6-23, dated 01.06.1971, 22.01.1974, 10.01.1974 (2 letters) and 29.01.1972 it has been decided that the procedure laid down below shall be followed in the matter of promotion of Group ‘D’ & Group ‘C’ Railway servants against whom disciplinary/ court proceedings are pending or are proposed to be initiated or whose conduct is under investigation. These instructions shall apply to:

(a) Promotions from Group ‘D’ to Group ‘C’, within Group ‘C’ and from Group ‘C’ to Group ‘B’ to selection posts; and
(b) Promotions within Group ‘D’, from Group ‘D’ to Group ‘C’ and within Group ‘C’ to non-selection posts.

2. Cases of Railway servants to whom the procedure will be applicable:
The procedure given below shall be applicable to:

(i) Railway servants under suspension;
(ii) Railway servants in respect of whom disciplinary proceedings for major penalty or pending or a decision has been taken by the competent authority to initiate major penalty disciplinary proceedings;
(iii) Railway servants in respect of whom prosecution for a criminal charge is pending or sanction for prosecution has been issued or a decision has been taken to sanction prosecution;
(iv) Railway servants against whom an investigation on serious allegations of corruption, bribery or similar grave misconduct is in progress either by the CBI or any other agency, departmental or otherwise.

3.1 Procedure to be followed:
Such a Railway servant shall not be promoted even if already born on the selection panel/ suitability list till after the result of the proceedings or investigation against him is known. There is, however, no objection to promote him if he is not under suspension or is not supposed to be suspended and the proceedings already initiated or are proposed to be initiated are for the imposition of only a minor penalty.

3.2 Such a Railway servant as aforesaid, if not already born on a selection panel/ suitability list, should be called along with other eligible candidates to appear at the written/ trade/ suitability test before the selection committee of the selection board. His suitability for promotion as also his position in the selection panel/ suitability list should be assessed as in the ordinary course.

3.3 On the basis of position assigned in the selection panel/ suitability list, a list of qualified persons should be prepared keeping in view the following:

(a) It should exclude the names of those mentioned in items (i) to (iv) of para 2 above,
(b) It should include names of those who are not under suspension and against whom disciplinary proceedings for the imposition of only a minor penalty have been initiated or are proposed to be initiated.

3.3.1 In the case of promotion to selection posts, from the list of persons prepared on the above basis a panel of the prescribed size as per extant orders less the number of persons excluded from the list vide para 3.3(a) above, who but for their suspension etc. would have figured in the selection panel should be prepared and announced as provisional selection panel.

3.3.2 In the case of promotion to non-selection posts, the list of persons prepared in terms of para 3.3 of equal to the number of actual vacancies plus anticipated vacancies should be announced as a provisional list.

3.4 The staff in the provisional selection panel/ suitability list should be advised in clear terms that their position in the selection panel/ suitability list is liable to be altered depending upon the result of the proceedings against the staff referred to in para 3.3(a) above, who but for their suspension etc. would have been included in the panel. In the case of promotion to the non-selection posts, posts in the promotional grade should be kept reserved for those referred to in para 3.3(a) above and only filled in an officiating capacity till finalization of the proceedings against them.

3.5 Action after completion of disciplinary cases/ criminal proceedings:
If the disciplinary proceedings against the person under suspension etc. for whom a vacancy has been reserved is, in the case of promotion to selection posts, finalize within a period of 2 years of the approval of the provisional panel and, in the case of promotion to non-selection posts, is finalize at any point of time, and if the persons is fully exonerated or his suspension is held to be wholly unjustified, he may be empanelled/ enlisted and promoted in his turn. This will also apply to cases of dropping of allegations or complaints in investigations or prosecution cases.
In case his junior in the selection panel/ suitability list gets promoted before the disciplinary proceedings/ court proceedings are finalized he should be promoted by reversing the junior most person if necessary and his pay on promotion should be fixed by allowing the intervening period during which he could not be promoted due to suspension etc., to be counted for increment in the higher grade, but arrears will not be advisable. Such benefit of proforma fixation of pay in the higher grade should also be given to such a person if he is junior most and it could be certified that but for his suspension etc. he would have been promoted to the higher grade.

3.6 If the disciplinary proceeding against the person under suspension etc. for whom a vacancy has been reserved, is finalized – in the case of promotions to selection posts – within a period of 2 years of the approval of the provisional panel or at any point of time – in the case of promotion to non-selection posts – and if such a person is inflicted only a minor penalty, he should automatically be assigned the position in the selection panel/ suitability list and his empanelment/ enlistment announced and he may be promoted in his turn. If his junior has already been promoted before interpolation of his name in the selection panel/ suitability list, he should be promoted reverting the junior most person if necessary and his pay on promotion should be fixed under the normal rules.
If such a person as aforesaid is held guilty and awarded one of the minor penalties of reduction to lower time scale of pay/ grade etc. or reduction to lower stage in the time scale of pay, his case should be referred to the authority which approved the original selection panel/ suitability list for consideration whether he is suitable for promotion in-spite of the penalty imposed on him. If he is considered suitable for promotion, his case for promotions and fixation of pay etc. should be dealt with in the same manner as that of a person who is awarded a minor penalty as indicated above.
If on the other hand, the person concerned is considered unsuitable for promotion, his case should be referred to the authority next above that which approved the original selection panel/ suitability list and that authority should take a final decision regarding the suitability or otherwise for promotion of such a person. If he is considered suitable for promotion by that authority, his case should then be dealt with in the same manner as that of a person who is awarded a minor penalty. If on the other hand, he is considered unsuitable for promotion by that authority, he should not be promoted on the basis of his earlier selection/ earlier decision regarding suitability and the vacancy reserved for him should be carried forward for inclusion in the number of vacancies for formation of next selection panel/ suitability list.
While reviewing the case of staff under suspension etc. after finalization of the disciplinary proceedings against them, the competent authority need not follow the rigid formula laid down for the purpose of promotion to the selection posts, i.e., to allot marks under various heads like record of service etc. In such cases, the competent authority may take an overall decision – whether it is for promotion to selection posts – having regard to the fact of the case, whether the persons concerned is suitable for promotion even after the conclusion of the disciplinary proceedings.
NOTE:
It is also classified that in a case where disciplinary proceedings have been held “warning” should not be issued as a result of such proceedings. If it is found, as a result of the proceedings, that some blame attaches to the Railway servant, at least the penalty of censure should be imposed.

3.7 In the case of promotions to selection posts, if the disciplinary cases against all the staff for whom vacancies have been reserved are finalized within a period of 2 years of the approval of the provisional panel, the panel should be finalized by the interpolation of the names of such persons at the appropriate places. Otherwise the panel has to be kept as provisional till the finalization of the last pending case. In so far as promotions to non-selection posts are concerned also, the provisional suitability list should be finalized after the finalization of the disciplinary cases against all the staff for whom vacancies have been reserved by interpolation of the names of suitable persons at the appropriate places. The list has to be kept as provisional till the finalization of the last pending disciplinary case.

3.8 In the case of promotion to selection posts, if the disciplinary case against any person for whom vacancy is reserved in the panel is not finalized within the period of 2 years of approval of the provisional panel and it becomes necessary to form the next panel and in the case of promotion to non-selection posts, if before finalization of the original list it becomes necessary to form the next list, the fresh panel/ list may be formed in accordance with the prescribed procedure subject to the following conditions:

(a) The persons who were found suitable on earlier occasions but excluded vide para 3.3(a) above should not be called to appear for the next selection/ suitability test etc. This is subject to the provision that, in the case of promotion to selection posts, a person junior to them in seniority has been promoted by virtue of empanelment or where the person concerned is junior most and it can be certified that but for his being under suspension etc. he would have been promoted against a non-fortuitous vacancy in his turn and continued to officiate in the higher grade for the minimum period prescribed for drawal of officiating allowance.
(b) For computing vacancies for holding next selection/ suitability list, the vacancies reserved for persons referred to under para 3.3(a) above and whose cases have not been finalized should not be taken into account.
(c) In respect of promotions to selection posts, the cases of persons referred to under para 3.3(a) above which are not finalized within a period of 2 years approval of the approval of the provisional panel and who are not called for the next selection, vide para 3.8(a) above, should be reviewed after finalization of the cases and dealt with for the purpose of empanelment, promotion, fixation of pay etc. on the lines indicated in para 3.5 and 3.6 above.

3.9 The cases of persons falling under 3.1 above should also be dealt with after finalization of the disciplinary proceedings against them keeping in view the principles laid down in Para 3.5 and 3.6 above. Where the person concerned is considered unsuitable for promotion consequent on consideration by the competent authority of the result of the disciplinary proceedings, his name should be removed from the panel. This should be done by the authority next above that which initially approved the panel after giving the person concerned an opportunity to explain his case against a proposed action.

NOTE: (1) If a person becomes due for promotion after the finalization of the disciplinary proceedings and the penalty imposed is one of the following, he should be promoted only after the expiry of the penalty:
(i) Withholding of promotion;
(ii) Withholding of increment;
(iii) Reduction to lower stage in time scale;
(iv) Reduction to a lower time scale, grade or post.
Provided that where the penalty imposed is withholding of increment and it becomes operative from a future date, the person concerned should be promoted in his turn and the penalty imposed in the promotion grade for a period which would not result in greater monetary loss. If the penalty imposed is censure, recovery from pay or stoppage of passes/PTOs, he may be promoted when due.

NOTE: (2) The provisional selection panel framed in accordance with the above instructions shall be current as provisional till a final panel is issued after completion of the disciplinary cases and the next panel being formed, if found necessary, is declared as final.

3.10 In certain categories of posts where minimum period of service is prescribed for promotion from one grade to the next higher grade, a Railway servant may not be able to put in the prescribed minimum period of service due to his non-promotion on account of suspension or his conduct being under investigation etc. In such a case if the Railway servant is fully exonerated and his suspension is held as wholly unjustified, the period during which his junior was promoted to the higher grade should be reckoned towards the minimum period of service for the purpose of determining his eligibility for promotion to the higher grade. In other cases, he should be promoted, if considered suitable by the competent authority, only after completion of the minimum period of service prescribed.

4. Six Monthly Review of cases:
It is necessary to ensure that the disciplinary case/ criminal prosecution/ investigation instituted against a Group ‘C’/ Group ‘D’ Railway servant is not unduly prolonged and all efforts to finalize expediently the proceedings should be taken so that the need for holding back the promotion in such cases is limited to the barest minimum. It has, therefore, been decided that the competent authorities concerned should review comprehensively the cases of such Railway servants on the expiry of 6 months from the date of the original selection/ original suitability test etc. Such a review should be done subsequently also every 6 months. The review should inter alia cover the following aspects:-

(i) The progress made in the disciplinary proceedings/ criminal prosecution and further measures to be taken as to expedite their completion;
(ii) Scrutiny of the material/ evidence collected in the investigation to take a decision as to whether there is a prima facie case for initiating disciplinary action or sanctioning prosecution.

If as a result of the review, the competent authority comes to the conclusion in respect of the cases covered by item (ii) above that there is no case for taking action against the Railway servant concerned, he may be given due promotion with reference to the position assigned to him by the Selection Committee or in the suitability list.

5. Procedure for ad hoc promotion:
In spite of six monthly review referred to in para 4 above, there may be some cases, where the disciplinary case/ investigation/ criminal prosecution against the Railway servant is not concluded even after the expiry of 2 years from the date of the original selection/ formation of suitability list. In such a situation, the Promoting Authority may review the case of the Railway servant concerned, provided he is not under suspension, to consider the desirability of giving him ad hoc promotion keeping in view the following aspects:-

(a) Whether the promotion of the officer will be against Public Interest;
(b) Whether the charges are grave enough to warrant continued denial of promotion;
(c) Whether there is no likelihood of the case coming to a conclusion in the near future;
(d) Whether the delay in the finalization of proceedings, departmental or in a court of law or the investigation is not directly or indirectly attributable to the Railway servant concerned;
(e) Whether there is any likelihood of misuse of official position which the Railway servant may occupy after ad hoc promotion, which may adversely affect the conduct of the departmental case/ criminal prosecution.

The appointing authority should also consult the CBI and take their views into account where the departmental proceedings or criminal prosecution arose out of the investigation conducted by the CBI. Where the investigation of serious allegations of corruption, bribery or similar grave misconduct is still pending, the CBI or the other authorities concerned should be consulted.

5.1 In case the Promoting Authority comes to a conclusion that it would not be against the public interest to allow ad hoc promotion to the Railway servant concerned, his case should be considered and he may be promoted in ad hoc way on the basis of his position in the original selection panel/ suitability list.

5.2 After a decision is taken to promote a Railway servant on ad hoc basis an order of promotion may be issued after making it clear in the order itself that – (1) the promotion is being made on purely ad hoc basis and the ad hoc promotion will not confer any right for regular promotion, and (2) the promotion shall be “until further orders”. It should also be indicated in the orders that the Government reserves the right to cancel the ad hoc promotion and revert at any time the Railway servant to the post from which he was promoted.

5.3 If the Railway servant concerned is acquitted in the criminal prosecution on the merits of the case or is fully exonerated in Deptt. proceedings or the investigation did not lead to criminal prosecution/ departmental proceeding, the ad hoc promotion already made may be confirmed and promotion treated as regular one from the date of ad hoc promotion with all the attendant benefits. In case the Railway servant could have normally got his regular promotion from a date prior to the date of his ad hoc promotion with reference to his position in the selection panel/ suitability list and the actual date of promotion of the person ranked immediately junior to him in the same panel/ select list, he should also be allowed due seniority and benefit of proforma promotion as envisaged in Para 3.5 and 3.6 above.

5.4 If the Railway servant is not acquitted on merits in the criminal prosecution but purely on technical grounds and the Government either proposes to take up the matter to a higher court or to proceed against him departmentally or if the Railway servant is awarded a major penalty in the departmental proceedings, the ad hoc promotion granted to him should be withdrawn and he should be restored to his original grade.

6. Procedure for confirmation:
In the case of Railway servant mentioned in item (i) to (iv) of para 2 above, their confirmation should also be withheld till the finalization of the disciplinary proceedings/ criminal prosecution. As regards investigation cases, confirmation should not be withheld merely because a regular case has been registered by the CBI or that complaints are being looked into in a departmental preliminary enquiry unless and until on concentration of the results of the investigation, either by the CBI or any other agency, departmental or otherwise, the competent authority has formed the opinion that a charge sheet may be issued to him on specific imputations as a part of departmental action or that sanction for prosecution may be accorded, where prosecution is proposed.

Download Railway Board Circular RBE No. 211/1988

Forward reference ⇒ RBE No. 13/1993