Ashok Kumar Gautam vs The Director, Central Bureau Of Investigation (CBI) & Anr.

Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ranjit More, Chairman

C.P. No. 866/2026

By order dated 16.07.2026 passed in O.A. No. 720/2023, this Tribunal allowed the Original Application and set aside the impugned order dated 16.06.2022, whereby the applicant had been prematurely retired from service under the provisions of FR 56(j). The Tribunal further held that the applicant would be entitled to all consequential benefits in accordance with law.

Mr. Rudra Pratap Singh, learned proxy counsel for the respondents, has placed on record a compliance affidavit dated 23.10.2026. He has drawn our attention to paragraph 3 thereof, wherein the respondents have made the following averments:

Learned proxy counsel for the respondents further submits that Office Order No. 2629/2026 has also been annexed to the compliance affidavit, which shows that the applicant has been reinstated in Government service in the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) in the rank of Senior Public Prosecutor and posted at CBI, ACB, Cochin.

Learned counsel for the applicant, however, submits that, as part of the consequential benefits flowing from the order of this Tribunal, the applicant ought also to have been considered for, and granted, the promotions due to him.

We have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the records of the case. As regards the claim for promotion, we observe that promotion cannot be claimed as a matter of right and is subject to the applicable rules, eligibility conditions and the prescribed administrative process. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that, in terms of the reinstatement order, the applicant is scheduled to join at Cochin tomorrow, i.e., on 28.10.2026. In these circumstances, the applicant must first join pursuant to the reinstatement order. The question of consequential benefits, including any claim relating to promotion, would have to be considered in accordance with law and the applicable rules. If, after joining, the applicant considers that he has been denied any promotion due to him, he shall be at liberty to avail himself of the appropriate remedy in accordance with law. However, such relief cannot be sought to be adjudicated in the present contempt proceedings.

In view of the reinstatement of the applicant pursuant to the directions issued by this Tribunal, no further issue survives for consideration in the present Contempt Petition. Accordingly, the Contempt Petition is closed. Notices issued, if any, stand discharged.

At the outset, learned counsel for the applicants, having taken instructions from his clients, seeks leave to withdraw the present M.A. with liberty to file a fresh one.