Service Law: Promotion – Annual Performance Appraisal Report(APAR) – Communication of – Held: Every entry in ACR of a public servant must be communicated to him/her within a reasonable period – Legitimate grievance can be made in respect of noncommunication of the entries – On facts, in a writ petition by employee challenging the non-disclosure of entries in APAR for 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 due to which the employee was unable to submit a representation at the material time, the High Court erred in holding that absent an adverse entry or an entry below the benchmark, the failure to communicate did not result in an actionable grievance – Thus, the order of the High Court set aside. Allowing the appeals, the Court
HELD: 1.1 The law laid down by the two-judge Bench of this Court in *Dev Dutt’s case that every entry in ACR of a public servant must be communicated to him/her within a reasonable period, has been reaffirmed by three judges in **Sukhdev Singh’s case. The judgment is declaratory in nature. The Union of India had also issued Office Memoranda on 14.05.2009 and 13.04.2010 seeking compliance by all Ministries and Departments. Moreover, on 19.10.2012, a specific communication was also addressed to public sector insurance companies. Even independent of these communications, the respondent was duty bound to comply with the law laid down by this Court. They cannot urge that the decision having been implemented from 2013-14, it has no application for the earlier years. [Paras 8, 9] [946-C, F-H]
1.2 For the normal channel, the appellant secured 64.45 marks against the cut-off of 68.98 for promotion from Scale III to Scale IV. For one of the years under consideration (2011-12) for the promotional exercise for 2014-15, the appellant was graded a “B”, while for the subsequent two years, he was graded an “A”. Consequently, the fact that the appellant was given a lower grading for 2011-12 would materially affect whether or not he should be promoted from Scale III to Scale IV for the year in question. The non-communication of the entries is, thus, a matter in respect of which a legitimate grievance can be made by the appellant. [Paras 12, 13] [947-F-H]
1.3 The promotional exercise of 2014-15 has been completed. The appellant has since been promoted in 2018. The ends of justice would be made if a direction is issued to the respondent to consider the representation, if any, that may be submitted by the appellant in respect of the grading which was assigned to him for the relevant years which were taken into consideration during the promotional exercise for 2014-15. [Para 14] [948-A-B]
1.4 It is directed that that within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, the respondent would communicate to the appellant the uncommunicated entries in the APARs for the years which were taken into account for the promotional exercise of 2014-15, to which, it would be open to the appellant to submit his objections and representation to the respondent within the stipulated period. The representation would be considered and thereafter, based on the result of the decision, the competent authority would take a decision on whether any modification in the decision for promotion from Scale III to Scale IV for 2014-15 in respect of the appellant is warranted. In order to ensure that this exercise is carried out fairly, it is directed that the competent authority would ensure that the representation that is submitted by the appellant is placed before an authority at a sufficiently senior level to obviate any bias or injustice. [Para 15] [948-C-F]
*Dev Dutt v Union of India (2008) 8 SCC 725 : [2008] 8 SCR 174 ; **Sukhdev Singh v. Union of India (2013) 9 SCC 566 : [2013] 5 SCR 1004 – relied on.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.