JUDGMENT AND ORDER : 1. Heard Mr. C.S. Sinha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Ms. A.S. Lodh, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the respondents no. 1 and 2. None appears for the remaining respondents despite due notice from the court [See the order dated 12.09.2016]. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has urged this court for directing the respondents no. 1 and 2 to permit him to the post of Assistant Director, Food, from the date when the proforma respondents were appointed and promoted to the said post by virtue of the notification under No. F.2-3(3)-ESTT/DF/2011/778-818 dated 11.01.2013 with all consequential benefits including the financial and seniority as per recommendation of the Departmental Promotional Committee held on 02.01.2013. It is the admitted position that the petitioners case after due consideration was kept in the sealed cover subject to the outcome of the disciplinary proceeding which was pending against him. 3. Mr. Sinha, learned counsel has submitted that the said disciplinary proceeding has been terminated by the order dated 27.01.2014 (Annexure-5 to the writ petition) where the following has been observed: “Considering all aspects and having regard to all facts and figures placed before me, I order to exonerate from the charge leveled against him on recovery of the entire amount of pecuniary loss worth Rs. 86,788/- (rupees eighty six thousand seven hundred eighty eight) only caused by him to the Govt. The said amount be deposited by Sri Kamala Kanta Debbarma, Sub-Divisional Controller (F) [the then Inspector (F)] in 2(two) monthly installments from the month next fallen due. The amount need to be credited/transferred to the Cash Credit Account like Sale Proceeds as per prescribed format of this office Memo No. F.2-6(1)-ESTT/DF/2010/12172-99 dated 26.06.2013.” 4. By the communication dated 15.03.2016 (Annexure 8 to the writ petition), the Special Secretary and Director, Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Department the petitioner was informed that his promotion could not be considered in view of a case pending in the apex court. By the communication dated 15.03.2016 (Annexure 8 to the writ petition), the Special Secretary and Director, Food, Civil Supplies & Consumer Affairs Department the petitioner was informed that his promotion could not be considered in view of a case pending in the apex court. From the said communication dated 15.03.2016, it clearly transpires that the department has no objection for considering promotion of the petitioner to the post of Assistant Director, Food following exoneration from the charges by the order dated 27.01.2014 and in terms of the recommendation which has been kept under the sealed cover on the basis of the resolution of the DPC meeting held on 02.01.2013. 5. Ms. Lodh, learned Additional Government Advocate has acceded to that fact and submitted that since the Apex court in a case emerging from the challenge in a separate case has been pleased to pass a stay order against giving promotion in the State of Tripura as in that litigation, the issue of the reservation is under consideration of the apex court. For that stay, the respondents are not in a position to consider the promotion of the petitioner. The moment, the order of stay would be vacated or the case would be decided, in terms of the outcome, the petitioners promotion would be considered without delay. Be that as it may, this writ petition is disposed of with the following direction: If on opening of the sealed cover, it is found that the petitioner was recommended for the promotion, the petitioner’s promotion shall be notionally given effect from the date when the proforma respondents were promoted in terms of the notification under No. F.2-3(3)-ESTT/DF/2011/778-818 dated 11.01.2013, but he will not be entitled to the actual financial benefit till resumption of the charge, if he is promoted to that post. 6. Having observed thus, the writ petition stands allowed to the extent as indicated above. There shall be no order as to costs.