Communication of adverse ACRs for denial of promotion in Government service

Tilak Marg Forum for Legal Questions Forums Service and Labour Laws Communication of adverse ACRs for denial of promotion in Government service

Tagged: 

Viewing 1 reply thread
  • Author
    Posts
    • #2775
      Anonymous
      Guest

      I have heard that there is a rule that ACRs of a government servant have to be communicated to him if his promotion is to be denied on the basis of those ACRs. Is this rule applicable even if the ACR is rated as “Good”?

    • #2809

      Yes, it is true that if a specific entry in the ACR (even if it is “Good” or “Very Good”) of a government servant is below the benchmark for promotion, then such ACR entry is required to be communicated to such government servant. A denial of promotion on the basis of such entry, without communicating the same to the government servant, would be bad in law.

      In the case of Dev Dutt v. Union of India, (2008) 8 SCC 725, the Supreme Court held that:

      “…every entry (and not merely a poor or adverse entry) relating to an employee under the State or an instrumentality of the State, whether in civil, judicial, police or other service (except the military) must be communicated to him, within a reasonable period, and it makes no difference whether there is a benchmark or not. Even if there is no benchmark, non-communication of an entry may adversely affect the employee’s chances of promotion (or getting some other benefit), because when comparative merit is being considered for promotion (or some other benefit) a person having a “good” or “average” or “fair” entry certainly has less chances of being selected than a person having a “very good” or “outstanding” entry.”

      The Supreme Court further held that a person getting any of the entries such as Very Good, Good, Average, Fair, Poor, should be communicated the entry so that he has an opportunity of making a representation praying for its upgradation, and such a representation must be decided fairly and within a reasonable period by the authority concerned. The Court further observed that if it was held that only “poor” entry is to be communicated, the consequences may be that persons getting “fair”, “average”, “good” or “very good” entries will not be able to represent for its upgradation, and this may subsequently adversely affect their chances of promotion (or get some other benefit).

      In the case of Sukhdev Singh v. Union of India, (2013) 9 SCC 566, the Supreme Court further held that:

      “…the view taken in Dev Dutt that every entry in ACR of a public servant must be communicated to him/her within a reasonable period is legally sound and helps in achieving threefold objectives. First, the communication of every entry in the ACR to a public servant helps him/her to work harder and achieve more that helps him in improving his work and give better results. Second and equally important, on being made aware of the entry in the ACR, the public servant may feel dissatisfied with the same. Communication of the entry enables him/her to make representation for upgradation of the remarks entered in the ACR. Third, communication of every entry in the ACR brings transparency in recording the remarks relating to a public servant and the system becomes more conforming to the principles of natural justice. We, accordingly, hold that every entry in ACR—poor, fair, average, good or very good—must be communicated to him/her within a reasonable period.”

      It may be pointed out that, long back, in the case of Gurdial Singh Fijji v. State of Punjab, (1979) 2 SCC 368 : AIR 1979 SC 1622, the Supreme Court had held that the adverse remarks made in the ACR cannot be acted upon by the authority to deny promotion to a post unless they have been communicated to the person concerned.

           


      Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers. List of his YouTube Videos.

Viewing 1 reply thread
  • The forum ‘Service and Labour Laws’ is closed to new Questions and replies.

You may also like to read these topics:

Vacancies arising after DPC
Promotion during EXOL (extraordinary leave) - validity of panel