Back
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
SOUMITRA SAIKIA
Pankaj Dixit, S/o K. C. Dixit – Appellant
Versus
Union of India and Ors., Through the Secretary to Govt of India, Ministry of Defence – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SOUMITRA SAIKIA, J.
Heard Mr. IH Saikia, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. H Gupta, learned Central Government Counsel, for the respondents.
2] The petitioner is a permanent resident of the state of Rajasthan and he was serving as an Executive Engineer (Civil) under the Border Roads Engineering Service in the General Reserve Engineering Force (GREF), 14 Border Roads Task Force under Project Vartak, C/o.99 APO, at the time when the writ petition was filed.
3] The essential facts necessary for deciding the matter is that the petitioner was initially appointed as an Assistant Executive Engineer (Civil) on 18-05-2002 in the General Reserve Engineering Force in Border Roads Engineering Service. The respondent Department had initiated the process for promotion to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil) from the feeder category of Assistant Executive Engineer (Civil) for the vacancy year 2010-11. The petitioner although eligible for being promoted to the next higher post from Assistant Executive Engineer (Civil) to the post of Executive Engineer (Civil), he was not promoted to the next higher post on the ground of having below benchmark grading (BBM) for the relevan
Uncommunicated ACR entries violate the right to fair representation under Article 14 of the Constitution, necessitating communication of all gradings to public servants for promotion processes.
Point of Law : Communication of entries in the ACRs and giving opportunity to represent against them is particularly important in higher posts which are in a pyramidical structure where often the pri....
Uncommunicated 'average' ACRs cannot adversely impact promotion under merit-cum-seniority; must be communicated for representation, else ignored as violative of Article 14 and natural justice princip....
Denial of promotion based on non-communicated below benchmark ACRs violates Article 14, and such non-communication is arbitrary and illegal.
Communication of aCRs within a reasonable period is crucial for fairness and transparency in public administration, as established in Dev Dutt and Sukhdev Singh.
Non-communication of ACR entries is arbitrary and violates Article 14, but does not invalidate subsequent promotion if criteria are met.
Non-communication of below benchmark grading in ACR/APAR is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The rejection of representation against below benchmark grading must be....
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
