2008 (10) TMI 599 - SC - Indian Laws

Denial of promotion - Good mentioned in C.R. instead of Very Good - Non Communication of adverse entries - Held that - The entry of good should have been communicated to him as he was having very good in the previous year. In those circumstances, in our opinion, non-communication of entries in the ACR of a public servant whether he is in civil, judicial, police or any other service (other than the armed forces), it has civil consequences because it may affect his chances for promotion or get other benefits. Hence, such non-communication would be arbitrary and as such violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. - However, appellant is not entitled to any pay or allowances for the period for which he had not worked in the Higher Administrative Grade Group-A, but his retrospective promotion from 28.08.2000 shall be considered for the benefit of re-fixation of his pension and other retrial benefits as per rules - Decided partly in favour of appellant.

Summary

Issues:
1. Eligibility for promotion to Higher Administrative Grade of Indian Postal Service Group-A.
2. Consideration of adverse entries in the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) for promotion.
3. Non-communication of ACR entries and its impact on promotion.
4. Retrospective promotion and benefits.

Eligibility for promotion to Higher Administrative Grade of Indian Postal Service Group-A:
The appellant, a Post Master General, was considered for promotion but was found ineligible by the Departmental Promotion Committee (D.P.C.) on two occasions. The appellant challenged this decision before the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) alleging that certain adverse entries in his ACR were wrongly considered. The CAT directed a review of the promotion process, and subsequently, the appellant was promoted and later retired from service.

Consideration of adverse entries in the ACR for promotion:
The CAT directed the authority not to consider specific adverse entries in the appellant's ACR, which had a bearing on his promotion. The Supreme Court held that non-communication of ACR entries, especially when it may impact promotion prospects, is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. The Court emphasized that such non-communication of adverse entries could have civil consequences affecting the individual's career progression.

Non-communication of ACR entries and its impact on promotion:
The Court noted that the appellant was not informed of the adverse grading given to him in the ACR, despite having a previous record of "very good." As a result, the Court ruled that the adverse entry of "good" should not have been considered for his promotion to a higher grade. The Court held that the appellant's promotion should have been based on communicated and fair assessments in the ACR.

Retrospective promotion and benefits:
The Court acknowledged the appellant's claim regarding the promotion of a junior officer and granted him retrospective promotion from a specific date. While the appellant was not entitled to backdated pay or allowances, the Court directed that his pension and other retirement benefits be recalculated based on the retrospective promotion date.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of fair assessment and communication of ACR entries in promotion decisions, ensuring that civil servants are not unfairly disadvantaged in their career progression.