Motor Insurance Policy Covers Cross-Border Travel If Specifically Authorized By Valid Permit Under MVA: Supreme Court Petrol Pumps Act As 'Commission Agents' For Mahanagar Gas, Liable To Pay Service Tax Under Business Auxiliary Service: Supreme Court Supreme Court Refuses To Dilute 'Bangalore Water Supply' Ratio, Affirms Worker Protection Remains The Core Of Industrial Disputes Act Order XXII Rule 9(3) CPC | Application Under Section 5 Limitation Act Must Be Filed Separately To Condonate Delay In Setting Aside Abatement: Supreme Court Principle Of Parity | Supreme Court Extends Benefit Of Fixed-Term Sentence To Co-Accused Based On Remission Period Right To Catch Fish Amounts To 'Profit à Prendre' And Is Compulsorily Registrable As A Lease Under Section 17(1)(d) Registration Act: Supreme Court Supreme Court Mandates Adoption Of Guidelines To Inculcate Sensitivity And Compassion In Judicial Processes For Sexual Offences 'Last Seen' Circumstance Is Weak Without Corroboration: Supreme Court Acquits Murder Accused PSEB | Pre-Regularization Service Must Be Counted As Qualifying Service For Pensionary Benefits: Supreme Court Writ Of Quo Warranto Cannot Be Used For Redress Of Personal Grievances By Unsuccessful Candidates In Selection Process: Supreme Court 'Case Of No Investigation': Supreme Court Acquits Murder Accused Citing 'Shoddy' Police Work And Lack Of Forensic Evidence 'Status Quo Cannot Be Vacated Without Appropriate Security': Supreme Court Directs Additional ₹200 Crores Deposit In RAKIA-Matrix Case SARFAESI Act | 'Bank' As Assignee Can Invoke Recovery Measures Even If Debt Was Originally Created By Non-Notified Financial Institution: Supreme Court 'CBI Failed Miserably': Supreme Court Tears Into 'Fabricated' Case, Acquits Bank Manager In 35-Year-Old Corruption Trial Mere Delay In Tax Deposit Cannot Be Equated With Non-Payment: Supreme Court Quashes Penalty On Saudi Arabian Airlines Revisional Power Under Section 56 Karnataka Land Revenue Act Cannot Be Invoked Beyond Three-Year Limitation Period: Supreme Court Prosecution Can’t Use Known Locations To Create 'Discovery' Fiction: Supreme Court Rejects Site Plan As Evidence Irretrievable Breakdown Of Marriage And Long-Term Separation Constitute Valid Grounds For Divorce Under Section 13(1)(ib) HMA: Supreme Court 'Proof Beyond Reasonable Doubt Is A Guideline And Not A Fetish': Supreme Court Acquits Man In 2007 Murder Case Over Fragile Circumstantial Evidence Plea Of Juvenility Is A Jurisdictional Fact; High Court Must Recall Final Judgments Under Section 482 CrPC To Remedy Miscarriage Of Justice: Supreme Court SEBI | Professional Clearing Members Have No Statutory Obligation To Verify Credit/Debit Positions Of Individual Clients Of Trading Members: Supreme Court

Supreme Court Orders Fresh Consideration for Promotion, Excluding Uncommunicated ACRs

04 September 2024 9:50 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has ordered a fresh consideration for the promotion of R.K. Jibanlata Devi to the post of Assistant Registrar, setting aside the previous Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) decision. The judgment, delivered on February 24, 2023, by Justices M.R. Shah and C.T. Ravikumar, emphasized the exclusion of uncommunicated Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) and highlighted the importance of fair assessment in promotion processes.

The Court, acknowledging the petitioner's claim for promotion based on seniority-cum-merit, directed a fresh assessment while disregarding the uncommunicated ACRs for the years 2016-17 and 2019-20. It emphasized that uncommunicated ACRs, even with a "Good" grading, cannot be relied upon for promotion considerations. Furthermore, the Court noted that the ACR grading for the year 2019-20, communicated to the petitioner just one day before the DPC meeting, should not have been considered since the petitioner was granted a 15-day period to make representations.

The judgment highlighted the need for fair and transparent assessment in promotion procedures. It clarified that the ACR weightage, accounting for 80 marks out of 100, should have been given due consideration during the interviews conducted by the Hon'ble Judges. The Court emphasized that the gradings in the ACRs and relevant information should have been made available to the interviewing Judges to ensure a fair evaluation.

In light of the ruling, the High Court of Manipur is required to undertake a fresh evaluation, taking into account the ACRs for the years 2017-18 and 2018-19. The Court directed the competent authority to complete the fresh consideration within six weeks from the date of the judgment. If the petitioner is promoted as a result, she will be entitled to all consequential benefits, including arrears and seniority, effective from the date of the promotion of her juniors.

This judgment serves as a reminder of the significance of effective communication of ACRs and fair assessment practices in the promotion of employees. It reinforces the principle of equal opportunity and highlights the need for transparent procedures to ensure justice in the workplace.

Date of Decision: February 24, 2023

R.K. Jibanlata Devi  VS High Court of Manipur through its Registrar General and others

Latest Legal News