The main legal point established in the judgment is that uncommunicated 'good' remarks in the Annual Confidential Report, which have a negative impact on promotion due to an enhanced benchmark, violate the principles of natural justice and should not be considered.

Abhilasha Kumari, J.

1. This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred with a prayer to quash and set aside the communication dated 07.04.2011, issued by respondent No. 2, as well as the recommendation of the Departmental Promotion Committee ("DPC") dated 10.02.2011, whereby the petitioner has been declared unfit for promotion to the post of Deputy Director (Training), Class-I. The petitioner has further prayed for directions to the respondent authorities to grant the deemed date of promotion to him with effect from 03.01.2012, that is, from the date when the juniors of the petitioner were promoted, with all consequential benefits and interest at the rate the Court may consider proper.

2. The brief facts of the case are as follows:

The petitioner participated in the selection for the post of Deputy Inspector, Class-II, and having been found suitable by the Gujarat Public Service Commission ("GPSC"), was appointed as such on 28.03.1987. Thereafter, the petitioner was promoted as Principal, in the cadre of Assistant Director (Training) Class-I, on 22.07.1993. On the date of the filing of the petition, the petitioner was holding the post of Assistant Director (Training) in the office of respondent No. 4 Director of Employment and Training.

3. According to the petitioner, the next promotional post was that of Deputy Director (Training), Class-I. The petitioner fell within the zone of consideration for promotion to the said post. The DPC met on 10.02.2011 and made its recommendations, finding the petitioner unfit for promotion. The recommendations of the DPC were communicated by the State Government to respondent No. 5, by the impugned communication dated 07.04.2011.

4. The Gujarat Civil Services Classification and Recruitment (General) Rules, 1967 ("the Rules"), were amended by a Notification dated 29.10.2005. By way of the said amendment, the benchmark for promotion to a Class-I post has been enhanced from 'good' to "very good". It is provided that officers who are graded as 'good' or 'unfit' shall not be included in the select-list for promotion. On the basis of this Notification, the State Government issued a Government Resolution dated 29.10.2005, in consonance with the said amendment in the Rules. The petitioner was found unfit for promotion for the reason that he did not fulfill the enhanced benchmark of having five 'very good's in his Annual Confidential Report ("ACR") for the last eight years, which were required for him to be considered for promotion.

5. It is the case of the petitioner that in his ACR for the year 2003-04, two remarks of 'good' for three months twenty six days and three months sixteen days, respectively were not communicated to him. Further, in the year 2005-06, one remark of 'good' for six months sixteen days, was not communicated to him. Further, for the entire years 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09, one remark of 'good' for each year, were not communicated. Lastly, in year 2009-10, one remark of 'good' for seven months and eleven seven days remained uncommunicated to the petitioner. In all, 'good' remarks covering a period of four years two month and twenty seven days remained uncommunicated to the petitioner from the year 2002-03 to 2009-10, constituting eight years, which was required to be considered by the DPC.

6. It is the case of the petitioner that for most of the above period under consideration, the petitioner has been assessed as 'good', which remarks were never communicated to him. As per the enhanced benchmark pursuant to the amendment in the Rules, the remark 'good' is required to be communicated to the petitioner as such a remark would mar the chances of promotion and would be considered adverse. As the said remarks have not been communicated to the petitioner, they ought not to have been considered. Aggrieved by the consideration of the above 'good' remarks that were uncommunicated and have ruined his chances of promotion, resulting in the impugned commun