Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Mr. Akhil Kumar Srivastava, J, Ms. Mallika Arya, A
Ajay Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Union of India through the Secretary, Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances and Pension – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. promotional eligibility contested based on acr evaluations. (Para 1 , 2 , 4 , 6 , 12) |
| 2. allegations of arbitrary selection and discrimination. (Para 3 , 5 , 11) |
| 3. judicial roles versus selection committee authority. (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. court's stance on selection committee's discretion upheld. (Para 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 5. final dismissal of applicant's case. (Para 16) |
ORDER
By Ms. Mallika Arya, AM
The applicant is belonging to the State Civil Services of MP. The name of the applicant did not figure in the notification whereas respondents No. 4 to 10 who were junior to the applicant in the State Civil Service got appointed to the IAS. The applicant submits that he has been superseded by his juniors on account of non-consideration of his candidature. He has been declared solely ‘unfit’ on the basis of un-communicated ACRs for the period ending March 2008. The applicant has further reasons to believe that the Selection Committee downgraded the ACR of the applicant for the remaining years under the garb of overall assessment. No reasons whatsoever have been recorded by the Selection Committee for not accepting the grading awarded by the departmental authority. Therefore, t
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
