JUDGMENT : Heard Mr. Caroline K. Lungawipuii, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, the learned Government Advocate appearing for the respondents. None appears for the private respondents. Office Note dated 31.01.2022 indicates that A/D card has returned back from the respondent Nos. 6, 7, 10, 12, 13, 14, 16, 19, 20, 22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30 and 31. 2. Further, Office Note dated 14.02.2022 indicates that A/D card has not returned back from respondent Nos. 8, 9, 11, 15, 17, 21 and 24. Since notice was sent by registered post with A/D due to all the private respondents as far back as on 06.10.2021, notice is deemed to be served in terms of Order 5 Rule 9(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. 3. Having regard to the nature of the case as projected by the petitioner, the writ petition is taken up for disposal. The claim of the petitioner is that she should be given promotion to the post of Inspector of Police (UB) from the post of Sub-Inspector of Police (UB) w.e.f. the date her immediate junior was considered and promoted. 4. Brief facts of the case essential for disposal of this writ petition is that the petitioner while working as Sub-Inspector of Police was issued with a charge Memorandum dated 11.09.2013 contemplating drawal of departmental proceeding against her on certain allegation prepared in the form of a charge. The departmental proceeding culminated into the passing of the impugned Order dated 14.09.2018 by the Disciplinary Authority by which she was imposed with a major penalty of withholding of increment for a period of two years for the years 2013 and 2014 with cumulative effect. Against the said order, the petitioner preferred an appeal before the Deputy Inspector General of Police, Northern Range, Mizoram, Aizawl. The Appellate Authority after considering the appeal of the petitioner vide Order dated 01.11.2018 set aside the punishment imposed upon her by the Disciplinary Authority vide Order dated 14.09.2018 and exonerated her from the charges leveled against her while treating the entire period of suspension as a period spent on duty. 5. While the petitioner was facing departmental proceeding, the respondent authorities concerned initiated the process of promotion for promoting eligible Sub-Inspectors to the next higher post of Inspector of Police (UB). 5. While the petitioner was facing departmental proceeding, the respondent authorities concerned initiated the process of promotion for promoting eligible Sub-Inspectors to the next higher post of Inspector of Police (UB). In the proceedings of the Police Establishment Board for such promotion, starting from 03.07.2015, eligible candidates who were junior to the petitioner in service were considered and recommended for promotion to the next higher post. In the proceeding held on 03.07.2015, the Police Establishment Board in respect of the petitioner recorded as follows:- “The case of SI(UB) Lalbiakmawii Renthlei (Sl/No-3 in the seniority list) is placed under sealed cover as she has been placed under suspension since criminal case vide No. EXN 106/106/2013/CPI dt. 03.07.2013 u/s 25A ND&PS Act, 1985 and DE case are pending against her. The sealed cover will be opened only after finalization of the criminal case and DE case pending against her.” 6. Despite the above observation recorded in the proceeding held on 03.07.2015, the petitioner was given promotion to the post of Inspector of Police (UB) with immediate effect vide Order dated 06.03.2019. Her claim otherwise is that since she has been exonerated by the Appellate Authority from the charge, she should be considered for promotion w.e.f. 03.07.2015, the date on which her immediate junior was considered and promoted and her case was kept under sealed cover. 7. Considering the above position, this Court had asked the learned Government Advocate to produce the sealed cover proceeding said to have been followed in the proceeding of Police Establishment Board held on 03.07.2015. As directed, the learned Government Advocate today has submitted a Communication dated 07.02.2022 which is written to her by the Under Secretary to the Government of Mizoram, Home Department stating that there is no separate sealed cover in original to produce either from the Home Department or the Police Headquarters other than the Meeting Minutes of the Police Establishment Board. Accordingly, enclosed to the said communication are the various Minutes of the Police Establishment Board and there is no sign of the sealed cover said to have been kept on 03.07.2015. 8. Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Government Advocate submits that since the respondents have not filed affidavit-in-opposition, she may be given some time for filing the same. Accordingly, enclosed to the said communication are the various Minutes of the Police Establishment Board and there is no sign of the sealed cover said to have been kept on 03.07.2015. 8. Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, learned Government Advocate submits that since the respondents have not filed affidavit-in-opposition, she may be given some time for filing the same. However, on perusal of the Communication dated 07.02.2022, it is clear that there is no in fact sealed cover in original or otherwise to be produced before the Court as was said to have been done in the Meeting Minutes of the Police Establishment Board held on 03.07.2015. Such being the case, I am of the considered view that no purpose will be served even if further time is granted to the respondents for filing their affidavit-in-opposition. It is a settled law that once a delinquent officer is exonerated fully from the charges imposed upon him or her, and the order of penalty set aside and particularly, when the entire period of suspension has been ordered to be considered as the period spent on duty, the officer concerned naturally will have to be considered for promotion from the date her immediate junior was considered and promoted. 9. In the result, I find merit in the writ petition and accordingly, the respondents, more particularly, the respondent Nos. 3, 4 and 5 are directed to convene a review DPC for the purpose of considering the eligibility of the petitioner to be promoted retrospectively w.e.f. 03.07.2015, i.e. the date on which her immediate junior was promoted. The review DPC be convened within a period of six (6) weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. If the review DPC finds the petitioner fit for promotion and recommends her, she shall be given promotion w.e.f. the date her immediate junior was promoted to the post of Inspector of Police (UB). 10. With the above observations and directions, the writ petition stands disposed of. 11. A photo copy of the Communication dated 07.02.2022 produced by Mrs. Linda L. Fambawl, the learned Government Advocate shall be retained on record and marked as ‘X’ for identification.