Uncommunicated ACRs Cannot Be Taken Into Account While Considering An Employee For Promotion: Madhya Pradesh HC
The Madhya Pradesh High Court has reiterated that uncommunicated ACRs cannot be taken into account while considering the case of an employee for promotion.
The Court was dealing with a writ petition filed by an employee of State Finance Service seeking restoration of her seniority and her placement in the Super Time Pay Scale.
A single-bench of Justice Subodh Abhyankar observed, "....it is apparent that uncommunicated ACRs cannot be taken into account while considering the case of an employee for promotion. Reference in this regard may also be had to the decision rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Abhijit Ghosh Dastidar vs. Union of India and others reported as (2009) 16 SCC 146 in which it is also held that even if a person has received good grade, in that case also it is liable to be communicated to the employee so that he can have a chance to upgrade the aforesaid grade."
The petitioner was represented by Advocate L. C. Patne while the Respondent State Department was represented by G.A./P.L. Bhagyashree Gupta.
The petitioner herein was aggrieved by the Department's decision to deny her promotion despite her junior being already promoted. It was her grievance that her name for promotion on Super Time Pay Scale (Director) was not considered only because it was found by the respondents that she was given Grade-C in her ACR of 2020 which she claimed was never communicated to her. It was her claim that she had obtained A+ grade in the previous years viz., 2016, 2017 and 2019, and thereafter in the year 2021 also she had obtained A+ grade, which is “Excellent”. In the year 2018 she had obtained A grade which stands for “Very Good”.
The State, in its reply filed, mentioned that the ACR of the petitioner was not adverse, hence, it was not communicated, and thus, the question of communication of Grade – C does not arise.
The Counsel for the petitioner cited court's division-bench ruling in Mehfooz Ahmad Vs. High Court of Madhya Pradesh & Another to argue that uncommunicated ACR(s) cannot be taken into consideration by the DPC. He thus submitted that had the aforesaid ACR been communicated to the petitioner, she would have taken steps to rectify the same, and in such circumstances the respondents were liable to exclude her grading for the year 2020, and should have considered her case for promotion.
The Court agreed with Counsel for petitioner's submission and further referenced Supreme Court's decision in Abhijit Ghosh Dastidar vs. Union of India and Others, in which it is also held that even if a person has received good grade, in that case also it is liable to be communicated to the employee so that he can have a chance to upgrade the aforesaid grade.
"Thus, when the facts of the present case are tested on the anvil of the aforesaid decisions, it is apparent that the petitioner obtained grade-C in her ACR of 2020, which was, admittedly not communicated to her by the respondent No.1." the court observed.
Accordingly, the court partly allowed the writ petition and directed restoration of petitioner's seniority and her placement in the Super Time Pay Scale (Director).
Cause Title: Mrs. Veena Jain vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and Others, Neutral Citation No. 2024:MPHC-IND:29171
Click here to read/ download order
