Non-communication of adverse ACR within the stipulated time period can adversely affect a government servant's career and should not form the basis for denying benefits, as established by legal principles and circulars issued by the Government.

ORDER :

1. The petitioner has filed the present writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, assailing the order dated 02-01-2016 (Anexure P/1) passed by the respondent No.1 by which the petitioner’s application for up-gradation of ACR has been rejected, also prayed for expunge of adverse remarks recorded in the ACR on 10.04.2008 (Annexure P/4) and the petitioner be kindly granted selection grade pay scale with effect from 27.07.1998. The petitioner has also prayed for issuance of direction to the respondent to consider her case for promotion on the post of Professor with all consequential benefits.

2. Brief facts as reflected from the record are that the petitioner was initially appointed as Assistant Professor (Chemistry) on 17-3-1987 for probation period of two years. The petitioner’s service conditions were governed by MP Educational Services (Collegiate Branch) Recruitment Rules 1967 (for short, “the Rules 1967”) subsequently these rules were deleted and new rules were framed by the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh as MP Educational Services (Collegiate Branch) Recruitment Rules 1990 (for short, “the Rules 1990”). The Rule 16 of the Rules, 1990 provides appointment by promotion. Schedule–IV of rule 16 of the Rules, 1990 provides that Assistant Professors are entitled to get senior pay scale and selection grade pay scale after fulfilling the conditions as provided under the rules.

The relevant Clause of Schedule-IV of the Rules, 1990 is reproduced below:-

“(A) for Senior Pay-scale-Asstt. Professor/Libraian/Sports Officer will be placed in senior pay-scale of Rs. 3000-5000 if he/she has (I) completed 8 years of service after regular appointment, or completed 5 years or 7 years of service in case of Ph.D. or M.Phil degree holders, respectively, (ii) participated in one orientation and one refresher course/summer institutes, each of approximately 4 weeks duration or remained associated with appropriate continuing education programmes, or comparable quality as may be specified by UGC; and (iii) consistently satisfactory performance appraisal report.

(B) for Selection Grade Pay-scale- Every Assistant Professor/Sports Officer/Librarian working in senior pay-scale shall be eligible for placement in the Selection Grade Pay-scale 3700-5700, provided he/she (i) has completed 8 years of service in the senior scale. The condition of 8 years shall be relaxed in case of officers who have completed atleast 16 years and for Ph.D. and M.Phil holders 13 and 15 years respectively of service on the post of Asstt. Professor/Sports Officer/Librarian, (ii) after posting in the senior scale has participated in two refreshers course/summer institutes each of approximately 4 weeks duration, has remained associate with approximately continuing education programmer equivalent to standards approved by UGC; and (iii) has consistently good performance appraisal reports.”

3. The petitioner has already completed the requisite service for grant of senior pay scale and since she fulfilled the criteria for grant of senior pay scale, she was granted the same by the erstwhile State of Madhya Pradesh. After reorganization of the State of Madhya Pradesh as State of Madhya Pradesh and Chhattisgarh, the petitioner was allocated to the State of Chhattisgarh. The respondents have considered the case of Assistant Professors who have been granted senior pay scale grade for grant of selection grade in the year 2004 and vide order dated 08.07.2004 (Annexure RJ/P-6) and the juniors to the petitioner have been granted selection grade pay scale with effect from 27.07.1998, but the case of the petitioner has not been considered, therefore, she has filed writ petition before this Court which was registered as WPS No. 3085/2005. This Court vide its order dated 22.07.2005 was directed the respondents to consider the representation submitted by the petitioner. The said order was not complied with, therefore, she filed Contempt Petition No. 101/2007 wherein it h