Remarks Made In Employee's ACR Creates Civil Rights, Adverse Remarks Must Be Reasoned: Punjab & Haryana High Court

The Punjab & Haryana High Court has said Annual Confidential Report (ACR) or Annual Performance Appraisal Report serves as a critical tool in evaluating the performance of employees, and since adverse remarks can deprive of promotion, it should be backed with reasons.Justice Sanjeev Prakash Sharma and Justice Meenakshi I. Mehta said, "Remarks made in the annual performance appraisal report or annual confidential reports, reflects the working of an individual. It creates civil rights because if the ACRs are tone-down or adverse remarks are entered, the concerned person would be deprived of his promotion as well as benefit of MACP for that period. Thus, before making any such remarks, reasons have to be mentioned". The Court was hearing an appeal filed by Haryana Government challenging the order of a single judge who while quashing the adverse remark had directed the Government to grant notional promotion to the Sub-Inspector Rani Devi, accompanied by all her service benefits.It was submitted that while Rani Devi was posted at a Police Station (Udyog Vihar, Gurugram, under DCP, West, Gurugram) she was granted commendation certificate by the Deputy Commissioner, Gurugram. However, she was transferred to Police Line, Gurugram, despite there being no complaint against her vide order dated 18.02.2015 and was issued advisory note on 26.02.2015 alleging that she was interfering in the work of I.O. of the Police Station, Udyog Vihar, which amounted to dereliction of duty and her integrity was brought under doubt.While she was working as Additional Station House Officer at Police Station, Udyog Vihar, adverse remarks were entered in her ACR for the period 23.11.2014 to 31.03.2015 that her "integrity was found doubtful."The petitioner submitted that the adverse remarks had been entered into her ACR due to personal bias of SHO Sube Singh, who had been harassing her.Feeling aggrieved against the said adverse remarks, the Rani Devi challenged it before the High Court in 2020 and submitted that on account of the said adverse remarks, she had been deprived of her due promotion to the post of Inspector from the date her juniors Sumitra Devi and Kamla Devi had been promoted.The petitioner had submitted representation to the Director General of Police against the adverse remarks, which was rejected by speaking order dated 16.09.2015. Her representation sent to Additional Chief Secretary was also rejected vide order dated 28.05.2019. The adverse remarks were, therefore, challenged before the High Court. The Single Judge took up both the cases relating to promotion as well as adverse remarks and after hearing arguments passed the impugned order whereby it quashed the adverse remark, retirement order and directed to accordingly promote Rani Devi.In the present Letter Patent Appeal, counsel appearing for the State argued that the order of the Single Judge granting promotion to the petitioner while setting aside the orders was wrongful and unjustified. He submitted that there was no occasion to promote the petitioner once there was an adverse entry in her ACR.After hearing the submissions, the Court found that the "The adverse remark of doubtful integrity was mentioned without there being any basis. The petitioner had earned 57 commendation certificates two of which were first class awarded for outstanding performance of duty."It noted further that in her 26 years service record, there was no red entry and there had been no case of any complaint against her. Thus, the Single Judge found that the adverse remark was wholly based on whims and fancies without there being any material document.The Court rejected State counsel's contention that the petitioner had misused the judicial remedy as she had already availed remedy by filing of petition to the Additional Chief Secretary, Government of Haryana, Department of Home."Availing of judicial remedy, is different from preferring representation to the Government. We also notice that the representation filed before the Additional Chief Secretary was for expunging the adverse remarks," it added.Speaking for the bench Justice Sharma highlighted that in the personal records of the petitioner and there was a specific mention of her reliability being honest, dependable, disciplined at all times with special appreciation. But it was only when she was posted as Sub-Inspector under the concerned SHO that stray entry of adverse nature and doubtful integrity was entered.It opined that the Single Judge has correctly assessed regarding the sharp contradiction that has crept in the working as for the same year the petitioner was awarded commendation certificate on Republic Day Parade for the year 2014-15, and during the almost same period adverse remark was entered in her ACR.While upholding the order of Single judge whereby the adverse remarks were quashed and compulsory retirement order was set aside, the Court said that the case of the petitioner was ought to have been directed to be placed for...

Remarks Made In Employee's ACR Creates Civil Rights, Adverse Remarks Must Be Reasoned: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Aiman J. Chishti

Tags