Leading judgment of supreme court on annual confidential report of government servant

In our opinion, 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.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Civil Appeal No. 5892 of 2006

Decided On: 23.04.2013

Sukhdev Singh Vs. Union of India (UOI) and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

R.M. Lodha, Madan B. Lokur and Kurian Joseph, JJ.

Citation:  (2013) 9 Supreme Court Cases 566 .

Print Page

When Judicial officer can be compulsorily retired in public interest?

When even verbal repeated complaints are
received against a judicial officer or on enquiries,
discreet or otherwise, the general impression
created in the minds of those making inquiries or
the Full Court is that concerned judicial officer
does not carry good reputation, such discreet
inquiry and or verbal repeated complaints would
constitute material on the basis of which ACR
indicating that the integrity of the officer is
doubtful can be recorded. While undertaking
judicial review, the Court in an appropriate case
may still quash the decision of the Full Court on
administrative side if it is found that there is no
basis or material on which the ACR of the judicial
officer was recorded, but while undertaking this
exercise of judicial review and trying to find out
whether there is any material on record or not, it
is the duty of the Court to keep in mind the nature
of function being discharged by the judicial officer,
the delicate nature of the exercise to be performed
by the High Court on administrative side while
recording the ACR and the mechanism/system
adopted in recording such ACR.”
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
APPELLATE SIDE
WRIT PETITION NO. 302 OF 2013
Smt.Shraddha Vinod Deo. ..
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra and another. 
CORAM : NARESH H. PATIL AND
B.P.COLABAWALLA, JJ.

PRONOUNCED ON : 8th October 2014.
Citation;2015(1) MHLJ 62

Print Page