SAROJ KUMAR versus UNION OF INDIA AND OTHERS

Citation: [2015] 9 S.C.R. 171 · Decided: 18-08-2015 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: DIPAK MISRA · Disposal: Dismissed

Judgment (excerpt)

[2015]9S.C.R.171 
SAROJKUMAR 
v. 
UNION OF INDIAAND OTHERS 
(Civil Appeal No. 6081 of2015) 
AUGUST 18, 2015 
[DIPAK MISRA AND PRAFULLA C. PANT, JJ.] 
A 
B 
Service Law - Promotion - Denial of- On the basis of 
uncommunicated remarks in the ACRs -After direction of c 
court in the first round of litigation, ACRs communicated to 
the employee - Subsequent thereto representation of the 
employee rejected - After the direction of the court in the 
second round of litigation, representation of the employee 
again rejected after reconsideration t/:Jereof - In the third D 
round !present litigation, Tribunal directed the authorities 
concerned to reconsider the case of the employee from the 
date his juniors were promoted - High Court set aside the 
order of Tribunal- On appeal, held: In the present case, not 
only the ACRs have been communicated to the employee, 
E 
his representation too had been rejected - Therefore, after 
communication of the ACRs and rejection of the 
representation, Tribunal was not correct in directing to 
reconsider the promotion of the employee from the date his 
juniors were promoted, having treated the remarks as F 
uncommunicated. 
Dev Dutt v. Union of India and Ors. (2008) 8 SCC 725: 
2008 (8) SCR 174; Abhijit Ghosh Dastidarv. Union of 
India and Ors. (2009) 16 SCC 146; Sukhdev Singh v. 
G 
Union oflndia (2013) 9 SCC 566: 2013 (5) SCR 1004 
- held inapplicable. 
Casa Law Reference 
2008 (8) SCR 174 
held inapplicable. 
171 
Para 8 H 
172 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[2015] 9 S.C.R. 
A (2009) 16 sec 146 
2013 (5) SCR 1004 
held inapplicable 
held inapplicable 
Para 8 
Para 8 
CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Civil Appeal No. 
B 6081 of2015 
· 
c 
D 
From the Judgment and Order dated 27.02.2014 of the · 
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Writ Appeal No. 50733 
of2012 
K. Radhakrishnan,Ajay Singh and Vivek Narayan Sharma 
for the Appellant. 
Tushar Mehta,ASG, Sunil Mathews, Mukesh Verma and 
B.V. Bairam Das forthe Respondents. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
PRAFULLA C. PANT, J. 1. This appeal is directed 
against judgment and order dated 27.2.2014, passed by the 
E 
High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Writ-A No. 50733 of 
2012 whereby the High Court has allowed the petition and set 
aside the order dated 16.1.2012 passed by the Central 
Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Berich (for short "the 
Tribunal") in Original Application (OA) No. 658 of 2011. By 
F said order the Tribunal (CAT) had directed that the claim by 
the appellant Saroj Kumar for promotion be considered 
ignoring earlier uncommunicated entries of Annual Confidential 
Reports (ACRs). The controversy in the present case relates 
to the downgrading AC Rs of the appellant without giving him 
G any opportunity, which were later comm4nicated and 
. representation made by the appellant was also considered 
and rejected. 
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties and 
H perused the papers on record. 
· 
SAROJ KUMAR v. UNION OF INDIAAND OTHERS 
173 
[PRAFULLA C. PANT, J.] 
3. Succinctly stated, the facts are that the appellant Saroj A 
Kumar was selected through Civil Service Examination, 1985, 
and was allotted Indian Defence Accounts Service (for short 
"IDAS"). 
On 29.1.1996 he was promoted as Junior 
Administrative Officer with effect from 12.1.1996. He was 
promoted in the pay scale of Rs.14200-18200 vide order dated 
B 
10.11.2000 and was given Selection Grade with effect from 
5.5.2000. Later, on 14.6.2004 he was posted as Joint 
Controller of Defence Accounts, Jabalpur (M.P.). A DPC was 
convened for promotion in the Senior Administrative Grade 
on 10.5.2006. It is pleaded by the appellant that to his utter C 
shock, ignoring him, juniors to him were promoted. 
4. Having aggrieved with the denial of promotion, the 
appellant, in the first round of litigation, filed OA No. 640 of 
2006 before CAT, Allahabad Bench, challenging the D 
proceedings of the DPC, and granting promotion to the junior 
officers. The Tribunal, vide order dated 18.9.2008, disposed 
of the OA remitting the. matter back to the respondent authorities 
for communication of annual confidential reports and to 
consider the case of the appellant afresh, keeping in mind the E 
law laid down by the Apex Court in Dev Duttv. Union of India 
and others1. In response to said order, the appellant was 
communicated the annual confidentia.1 reports and he submitted 
representation on 29.7.2009 to the respondent authorities F 
pleading that in Abhiji

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.