1. Dispute regarding the reliance on uncommunicated adverse Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) for the purpose of promotion. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
2018 Supreme(SC) 1286
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
KURIAN JOSEPH, SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, JJ.
Rukhsana Shaheen Khan - Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Appeal No. 32 of 2013
Decided On : 28-08-2018
Important Points
IMPORTANT POINT
Uncommunicated ACRs cannot be relied upon for the purpose of considering a person for promotion.
Uncommunicated ACRs cannot be relied upon for the purpose of considering a person for promotion.
Subject
Employment Law - Promotion
Headnote
Service law – Promotion – Uncommunicated ACRs – Cannot be relied upon for the purpose of considering a person for promotion. (Para 2)
(2013) 9 SCC 566 – Relied upon
(2009) 16 SCC 146 – Referred
Facts of the case:
The sole issue involved in this appeal is whether the uncommunicated Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs), which are adverse to the appellant, should have been relied upon for the purpose of consideration of the appellant for promotion.
Finding of the Court:
Uncommunicated ACRs cannot be relied upon for the purpose of considering a person for promotion.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Whether uncommunicated adverse Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) can be legally relied upon when considering an employee for promotion. (Para 1 )
3. The court observed that settled law prohibits the reliance on uncommunicated adverse ACRs during the promotion process. (Para 2 )
4. Uncommunicated and adverse Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) cannot be relied upon in the process of considering an employee for promotion. (Para 2 )
5. Appeal allowed; impugned judgment set aside with directions to ignore uncommunicated adverse ACRs, provide a hearing, and take a fresh decision. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 )
6. Can uncommunicated adverse Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) be used for promotion?
No, it is settled law that uncommunicated and adverse ACRs cannot be relied upon in the process of considering an employee for promotion. (Para 2 )
7. What is the required procedure if uncommunicated adverse ACRs were wrongly considered for promotion?
The competent authority must ignore the uncommunicated adverse ACRs, afford the employee an opportunity of hearing, and take a fresh decision in accordance with law. (Para 3 )
JUDGMENT :
Kurian, J.
1. The sole issue involved in this appeal is whether the uncommunicated Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs), which are adverse to the appellant, should have been relied upon for the purpose of consideration of the appellant for promotion.
2. In view of the decision of this Court in Sukhdev Singh Vs. Union of India & Ors. reported in (2013) 9 SCC 566, there cannot be any dispute on this aspect. This Court has settled the law that uncommunicated and adverse ACRs cannot be relied upon in the process.
3. This appeal is, accordingly, allowed and the impugned Judgment is set aside with the following directions :
(a) The competent authority is directed to ignore the uncommunicated adverse ACRs and take a fresh decision in accordance with law.
(b) The appellant shall be afforded an opportunity of hearing in the process.
4. It will be open to the appellant to make all available submissions, including the reference to the Judgment of this Court in Prabhu Dayal Khandelwal Vs. Chairman, U.P.S.C & Ors. reported in (2009) 16 SCC 146.
5. The above exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from today.
No costs.
