Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, ASHA MENON
Hari Mohan Rathore – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to adverse remarks in acr (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. court's limited scope of review (Para 8) |
| 3. dismissal of writ petition (Para 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral):--The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the letters dated 09th September, 2016 and 26th August, 2019 whereby the Respondent rejected the Petitioner's representations for expunction of adverse remarks in the Petitioner's ACR. Petitioner also challenges the proceedings initiated against the Petitioner based on the Petitioner's A.C.R. of 2014-15.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the Petitioner was a member of the CRPF and was posted as a company commander on 05th August 2014. He states that adverse entries were made in the A.C.R. of the Petitioner by the then Commandant that the behaviour of the Petitioner with subordinates is not proper and that the Petitioner allegedly practices regionalism and casteism. He further states that in the ACR, it was also stated that Petitioner was not a good officer and required supervision. He states that the Petitioner had been given grading of "Below G
Court upheld the validity of adverse remarks in a public servant's ACR, establishing that judicial review does not extend to evaluating ACR assessments without evidence of arbitrariness or mala fides....
Challenges to adverse ACR entries must be raised promptly, as prolonged delays warrant dismissal due to principles of delay and laches.
The court emphasized the importance of allowing public servants to improve their performance based on ACR entries and highlighted the limited role of the court in reviewing ACR entries.
The reviewing authority had proper jurisdiction to assess performance, and the petitioner's claims regarding adverse remarks were found to lack merit, emphasizing settled law regarding jurisdiction l....
Delay defeats equity and law favors the vigilant, and timely enforcement of rights is crucial in writ actions.
The court holds that downgrading public servants' ACRs requires substantial reasoning and fairness; previous good performance must not be overshadowed by isolated adverse remarks without justificatio....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
