Whether adverse annual confidential report can be challenged on ground that reviewing officer has given remark belatedly?

 Thus, the Tribunal has recorded that the Reviewing Officer for the year 2001-02 has written her remarks 2 years and 2 months after Reporting Officer has written his remarks. For the year 2002-03, remark have been written by the Reviewing Officer after a gap of 1 year and 5 months and for the year 2003-04, remarks are written after Smt. Bhave left the department of Atomic Energy. The Tribunal has found that notwithstanding the ambiguity of date of writing of remarks by the Reviewing Officer the remarks still show that the Reviewing Officer has not taken pains to record detailed reasons for downgrading ACRs of the respondent from 'Very Good' to 'Average' (2 levels below). In fact the OM dated 23/09/1985 has prescribed the time schedule for preparation of the confidential report. The Reviewing Officer has far exceeded this time schedule. Having gone through the reasoning of the Tribunal, we do not find that the conclusion reached by the Tribunal about the adverse remarks and below-benchmark grading recorded by the Reviewing Officer after inordinate and unexplained delay is in any manner perverse or unwarranted. 

Reliance on these gradings of the Reviewing Officer by the petitioners for denial of promotion to the respondent is therefore unjustified.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY

Writ Petition No. 953 of 2017

Decided On: 10.01.2018

Union of India and Ors. Vs. Vikas Chand Chaturvedi and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

V.K. Tahilramani, Actg. C.J. and M.S. Karnik, J.

Citation: 2018(2) MhLJ 403

Print Page

Whether Details of ACR reviewing officer should be disclosed in RTI?

The exemption is
from disclosure to a third party and not to the employee. In
fact, as explained in Dev Dutt (supra), if the intention of
making adverse entries, in the ACRs of an employee, is to
improve his performance, then the purpose is not achieved
by keeping the information secret from him. Unless adverse
entry is communicated to the employee and he is allowed to
explain his position, the exercise of getting improved his
performance would not be achieved. Cases of error, malice,
act of arbitrariness and unreasonableness cannot be ruled
out.
An employee, as a part of good governance, must
know who his reporting and accepting authority is. In fact,
it is not a trade secret at all. It is known to all within the
organization.
Disclosure of their names, in no manner,

would jeopardize their relationship either with the employee
or with the employer. There is no question of compromise
of any confidentiality in adopting such a practice. There is
no threat to life of any person. There is also no question of
invasion of privacy.
Information relating to posting, transfer and
32.
promotion of clerical staff of a Public Sector Undertaking

(Bank) does not pertain to any fiduciary relationship of the
bank vis-à-vis its employees, within the dictionary meaning
of the word “fiduciary”.
Also, such information cannot be
said to be held in trust by the employer on behalf of its
employees. (See: Canara Bank v. The Central Information
Commission, Delhi and another, AIR 2007 Kerala 225).
Information relating to third party, cannot be
33.
disclosed, even in public interest, without disclosing and
affording opportunity to the concerned. {See: Centre for
Development of Advanced Computing v. Brig. (Retd.) Ujjal
Dasgupta and another, AIR 2010 Delhi 132; and Arvind
Kejriwal v. Central Public Information Officer & another, AIR
2012 Delhi 29}.
34.
An
applicant
is
entitled
for
information,
prescribing the criteria and the marks allotted under
different heads for giving employment to public servants.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CWPs No.6675, 6676, 6677, 6678, 6679,
6680, 6681, 6682, 6683 & 6824 of 2013.

Date of Decision : March 1, 2014.

State Bank of India Vs
(In all the petitions)
The Central Information Commission &
Another (In all the petitions).
Coram:
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sanjay Karol, Judge.
The Hon’ble Mr. Justice V.K. Sharma, Judge.

Print Page