* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

Reserved on: 11.11.2025

Pronounced on: 22.12.2025

+ W.P.(C) 9600/2023

DEEPAK SHERAWAT .....Petitioner

Through: Mr.Rajesh Kumar Gautam and

Mr.Bhumit Solanki, Advs.

versus

REGISTRAR GENERAL, HIGH COURT OF DELHI AND ORS. .....Respondents

Through: Ms.Padma Priya and

Ms.Poornima, Advs.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA

HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MADHU JAIN

J U D G M E N T

NAVIN CHAWLA, J.

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner, praying for reconsideration of his promotion to the Delhi Higher Judicial Service (‘DHJS’) as on 15.11.2019, by taking into account his upgraded Annual Confidential Report (‘ACR’) graded as ‘B+’ for the year

2018.

FACTS OF THE CASE:

2. The brief facts giving rise to the present petition and thereafter, are that the petitioner was appointed in the cadre of the Delhi Judicial

Service (‘DJS’) on 29.03.2007 and was uninterruptedly awarded Grade ‘A’ in his ACRs from the year 2012 to 2017.

3. In 2018, however, his ACR was downgraded to Grade ‘B’, which was communicated to the petitioner by the respondent no. 1, vide letter dated 27.11.2019.

4. In the meanwhile, a Scrutiny Committee Meeting was held on 02.11.2019 to consider filling up, on a temporary basis, the posts lying vacant under the 65% promotion quota on the basis of merit-cum- seniority from amongst the officers of the DJS in the Grade of Civil Judge (Sr. Division) to the DHJS. The said Committee considered the eligible officers for promotion on the following criteria:

“The names of those offices be recommended for promotion against vacant posts who have got B+ grading for the year 2018 and at least two B+ gradings during the last four preceding years, i.e. during years 2014 to 2017. It is also to be taken into account whether any serious complaints against any of the officers recommended for promotion is pending or not till date.”

5. As the petitioner had been awarded Grade ‘B’ in the ACR for the year 2018, he was not found fit for promotion to the DHJS.

6. Based on the recommendations of the Scrutiny Committee, a list of the officers of the DJS being appointed/promoted to the DHJS was issued vide Notification dated 15.11.2019, which did not include the petitioner.

7. It is the case of the petitioner that, being placed at Serial No. 15 in the seniority list, he would have been entitled to promotion but for his adverse ACR, which had not been communicated to him at the relevant time.

8. It is further the case of the petitioner that the aforesaid downgrading of his ACR was not communicated to him till December 2019, and that he became aware of the same only upon learning of his exclusion from the process for promotion to the DHJS.

9. Accordingly, the petitioner submitted a representation dated 04.09.2020 to the respondent no. 1, requesting that his ACR for the year 2018 be reviewed and upgraded, and that his seniority be restored by granting him promotion.

10. The said representation was partly accepted by the respondent, and the petitioner’s ACR Grade for the year 2018 was upgraded from ‘B’ to ‘B+’. The same was communicated to the petitioner vide letter dated 14.10.2022 issued by the respondent no. 1, addressed to the learned Principal District & Sessions Judge, Shahdara, Karkardooma, Delhi.

11. In the meantime, a complaint was filed against the petitioner by one Mr. Jaggi, alleging that the petitioner had obtained his Law Degree from Agra while he was employed as a Lower Division Clerk (‘LDC’) in the Delhi Courts. It is alleged that the working hours of an LDC in the Delhi Courts are from 10:00 am to 5:00 pm, and during the said period, the petitioner had also pursued his Law course and obtained a degree, thereby suggesting that he was not a regular student of Agra University. On this basis, he was accused of having concealed material facts at the time of his appointment as an officer of the DJS.

12. The case of the petitioner for promotion was again placed before the Scrutiny Committee in its meeting held on 01.02.2023, however,