Employees Entitled To Know Orders Or Communication Which Jeopardizes Their Careers Or Service Benefits: Gujarat HC
The Gujarat High Court has observed that the employees are entitled to know the orders/communications/decisions immediately, which jeopardize their careers or service benefits so that they can take proper recourse questioning them.
A Letters Patent Appeal was filed assailing the judgment passed by a Single Judge dismissing the writ petition which was filed by the Appellant challenging the action of the Registrar General denying him promotion to the post of Principal Private Secretary, Class-I.
The Division Bench of Justice AS Supehia and Justice Mauna M Bhatt observed, “We are constrained to make the observations in the manner that the entire issue has been dealt with by the respondents. No explanation is coming forth from the respondents for the delay in communicating the letter dated 07.10.2014, and why it was communicated in the year 2017. In fact, the delay has occurred on the part of the respondents. Such an approach was not expected from the esteemed respondent-Institutions. The employees are entitled to know the orders/communications/decisions immediately, which jeopardize their careers or service benefits, so that they can take proper recourse questioning them.”
Advocate Vaibhav A Vyas appeared for the Appellant whereas Advocate Hamesh Naidu appeared for the Respondents.
The appellant joined the service as an English Stenographer in Grade II and was promoted to the post of English Stenographer Grade-I. He has served in the establishment at the District Court, Chotta Udepur since it was established. The issue of denial of promotion to the post of Principal Private Secretary, Class-I cropped up when the order was passed by the Principal District Judge conferring promotion to the employees, as mentioned in such order in the cadre of Stenographer Grade-I (Class-I).
The appellant meanwhile retired in July 2013. The appellant became eligible for promotion on May 12, 2013. On coming to know about the said order denying him promotion ex post facto to the post of Principal Private Secretary, Class-I the appellant made a representation to the Registrar General, High Court of Gujarat.
The Registrar General also wrote a letter to the Principal District Judge disclosing that the appellant was not appointed ex-post- facto to the post of Principal Private Secretary, Class-I on two grounds (i) Adverse remarks communicated in the Confidential Report for the period from 18.05.2012 to 31.03.2013 and (ii) His merit-cum-efficiency report for the last five years is ‘Average’.
After perusing the facts and circumstances of the case, the Court said, “The approach of the respondents in handling the entire issue right from the recording of the entries in the confidential reports to its communication, appears to be casual and lackadaisical. The entries in the confidential reports are recorded in a perfunctory manner, and are not in rhyme with the administrative instructions governing the confidential reports. It is surprising that for the period from 2009 to 2010, the confidential reports are missing, and without the record, the same are considered for denying the promotion. There is no record available suggesting that the adverse remarks are communicated to the appellant.”
Accordingly, the Court allowed the appeal and quashed the impugned judgment. The Court directed the Respondents to confer the promotion/up-gradation/appointment to the appellant to the post of Principal Private Secretary, Class-I ex post facto from the date of his eligibility.
Cause Title: Babubhai Jethabhai Patel v. Registrar General & Ors.
Appearances:
Appellant: Advocate Vaibhav A Vyas
Respondents: Advocate Hamesh Naidu
