9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 81X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ery entry in ACR – poor, fair, average, good or very good – must be communicated to him/her within a reasonable period. - appellant has already been promoted. In view thereof, nothing more is required to be done. Civil Appeal is disposed of with no order as to costs. However, it will be open to the appellant to make a representation to the concerned authorities for retrospective promotion in view of the legal position - Decision in the case of Dev Dutt vs. Union of India [2008 (5) TMI 632 - SUPREME COURT] followed. - Civil Appeal No. 5892 of 2006 - - - Dated:- 24-4-2013 - R. M. Lodha, Madan B. Lokur And Kurian Joseph,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Ansar Ahmad Chaudhary,Adv. For the Respondent : Mr. Mohan Parasaran, SG Mr. D.L. Chidananda, Adv. Mr. Asgha G. Nair, Adv. Mr. S.N. Terdal, Adv. Mr. Harinder Mohan Singh ,Adv Ms. Shabana, Adv. ORDER While granting leave on December 12, 2006, a two Judge Bench (S.B. Sinha and Markandey Katju, JJ.) felt that there was inconsistency in the decisions of this Court in U.P. Jal Nigam and others vs. Prabhat Chandra Jain and others (1996)2 SCC 363, and Union of India and another vs. Major Bahadur Singh (2006)1 SCC 368 and c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cated. As we view it the extreme illustration given by the High Court may reflect an adverse element compulsorily communicable, but if the graded entry is of going a step down like falling from 'very good' to 'good' that may not ordinarily be an adverse entry since both have a positive grading. All that is required by the authority recording confidentials in the situation is to record reasons for such downgrading on the personal file of the officer concerned and inform him of the change in the form of an advice. If the variation warranted be not permissible, then the very purpose of writing annual confidential reports would be frustrated. Having achieved an optimum level the employee on his part may slacken in his work, relaxing secure by his one-time achievement. This would be an undesirable situation. All the same the sting of adverseness must, in all events, not be reflected in such variations, as otherwise, they shall be communicated as such. It may be emphasised that even a positive confidential entry in a given case can perilously be adverse and to say that an adverse entry should always be qualitatively damaging may not be true. In the instant case we have se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me particularly in A.K. Praipak vs. Union of India (1969)2 SCC 262; Maneka Gandhi vs. Union of India (1978)1 SCC 248; Union of India vs. Tulsi Ram Patel (1985)3 SCC 398; Canara Bank vs. V.K. Awasthy (2005)6 SCC 321 and State of Maharashtra vs. Public Concern for Governance Trust (2007)3 SCC 587 concluded that every entry in the ACR of a public service must be communicated to him within a reasonable period whether it is poor, fair, average, good or very good entry. This is what this Court in paragraphs 17 18 of the report in Dev Dutt3 at page 733: In our opinion, every entry in the A.C.R. of a public servant must be communicated to him within a reasonable period, whether it is a poor, fair, average, good or very good entry. This is because non-communication of such an entry may adversely affect the employee in two ways : (1) Had the entry been communicated to him he would know about the assessment of his work and conduct by his superiors, which would enable him to improve his work in future (2) He would have an opportunity of making a representation against the entry if he feels it is unjustified, and pray for its upgradation. Hence non-communication of an entry is arbitrary, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or promotion or get other benefits (as already discussed above). Hence, such non-communication would be arbitrary, and as such violative of Article 14 of the Constitution. 6. We are in complete agreement with the view in Dev Dutt3 particularly paragraphs 17, 18, 22, 37 41 as quoted above. We approve the same. 7. A three Judge Bench of this Court in Abhijit Ghosh Dastidar vs. Union of India and others (2009)16 SCC 146 followed Dev Dutt 3. In paragraph 8 of the Report, this Court with reference to the case under consideration held as under: Coming to the second aspect, that though the benchmark very good is required for being considered for promotion admittedly the entry of good was not communicated to the appellant. 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, noncommunication 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 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
