SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Chh) 128

HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR 
Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.
Bela Manikpuri, W/o Dharmendra Kumar Manikpuri - Petitioner 
Versus 
State Of Chhattisgarh - Respondent 
WPS No. 4326 of 2024
Decided On : 10-01-2025

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. Pankaj Singh, Advocate.
For the State :Mr. Suyashdhar Badgaiya, Deputy Government Advocate.

Uncommunicated adverse remarks in an ACR cannot be relied upon for promotion decisions, ensuring adherence to principles of natural justice.

Headnote:

(A) Chhattisgarh Law and Legislative Department (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1983; Chhattisgarh Civil Service (Promotion) Rules, 2003 - Promotion - Challenge to promotion order based on uncommunicated adverse remarks in ACR - Petitioner, senior and qualified, was superseded by junior - Court held that uncommunicated ACR cannot be relied upon for promotion decisions, reaffirming principles of natural justice and transparency. (Paras 3, 6, 9)

(B) Natural Justice - Requirement for communication of adverse remarks in ACR - Supreme Court established that uncommunicated ACRs cannot be considered in promotion decisions, ensuring employees have opportunity to respond and improve. (Paras 7, 8)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged a promotion order favoring a junior colleague, asserting that her seniority and qualifications were overlooked due to uncommunicated adverse remarks in her ACR. The petitioner was not informed of these remarks, which led to her non-promotion.

Findings of Court:
The court found that the adverse remarks were not communicated to the petitioner, violating principles of natural justice, and directed her promotion consideration while ignoring the uncommunicated remarks.

Issues: The main issues were whether uncommunicated adverse remarks in the ACR could be considered for promotion and the legality of the promotion order favoring a junior employee.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that uncommunicated adverse remarks in an ACR cannot be relied upon for promotion decisions, emphasizing the need for transparency and the opportunity for employees to respond to such remarks.

Result: Petition allowed; authorities directed to consider the petitioner's promotion ignoring uncommunicated adverse remarks.

Order :

(Amitendra Kishore Prasad, J.)

1. The petitioner has filed this petition challenging the impugned promotion order dated 7/03/2024 by which the respondent No.4 who happens to be junior to the petitioner has been promoted leaving the petitioner. The Departmental Promotion Committee has recommended the name of the respondent No.4 despite the fact that the petitioner is senior and qualified. The petitioner is further praying to expunge the uncommunicated adverse remarks in the Annual Confidential Report (ACR).

2. The petitioner has prayed the following reliefs:-

“(i)That the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction or any other appropriate writ direction set aside the impugned promotion order dated 07.03.2024 promoting Shri Ram Singh Markam junior to the petitioner, leaving the petitioner - seniority without any valid reason and against the services condition rule of the department (Annexure P/1) and;

(ii)That, the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction or any other appropriate writ direction set aside the impugned Department Promotion Committee proceeding dated 05.02.2024 the DPC recommended the promotion of Shri Ramsingh Markam, who is junior to the petitioner, to the post of Section Officer. This decision lacks any discernible reason. Despite the petitioner's seniority and qualifications, Shri Ram Singh Markam was unjustly and arbitrarily promoted, while the petitioner was superseded on uncommunicated tip. (Annexure P/2)

(iii)That the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction or any other appropriate writ direction to respondent conduct the review DPC for the post of Section Officer and consider the petitioner candidature according to services condition rule of the department and communicated ACR of the Petitioner and;

(iv)That the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction or any other appropriate writ direction to respondent authority to decided the representation dated 07.06.2024, urging the authorities to reconsider her candidature and grant her rightful promotion over Shri Ram Singh Markam in time bound period (Annexure P/5) and;

(v)This Hon'ble Court may direct the Review Departmental Promotion Committee not to consider/rely upon the adverse remark/tip of whatsoever nature included in the Annual Confidential Report of the Petitioner while considering the candidature for promotion to the next higher post; and

(vi). That the Hon'ble Court may be pleased to issue a writ, order or direction or any other appropriate writ direction to expunge of uncommunicated adverse remark/Tip in the ACR or not acted upon in future i.e.

^dk;Z esa v:fp vkSj dk;kZy; esa okrkoj.k nwf”kr djus dh izo~fRr^^

(vii) Any other relief, which this Hon'ble Court deems, fit in the facts and circumstances, may also be granted in favour of the petitioner.”

3. The case as projected by the petitioner is that she was initially appointed as Typist vide order dated 5/05/2006 in the office of Advocate General and subsequently she was promoted vide order dated 7/08/2014 as Assistant Grade-II. Thereafter, vide order dated 13/11/2019 she was further promoted to the post of Assistant Grade-I. The respondent No.4 was also appointed as Typist and he was placed below the petitioner. The petitioner was senior in the gradation list dated 1/04/2023. A DPC was convened for promotion of two vacant seats of Section Officer from the feeder cadre of Assistant Grade-I. The name of the petitioner was within the zone of consideration. She was ranked at serial number-3. The respondent No.4 was placed at serial number -4. The DPC was convened on 5/02/2024 and after evaluating candidature of the respective parties and after following the Chhattisgarh Law and Legislative Department (Recruitment and Conditions of Service) Rules, 1983 as well as Chhattisgarh Civil Service (Promotion) Rules, 2003 which is based upon seniority- cum-merit/fitness and further while considering the ACR’s for the past fi

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top