UNION OF INDIA & ORS. versus E.G. NAMBUDIRI

Citation: [1991] 2 S.C.R. 451 · Decided: 23-04-1991 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: K.N. SINGH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 3 judgment(s) · cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

' 
UNION OF INDIA & ORS. 
v. 
E.G. NAMBUDIRI 
APRIL 23, 1991 
[K.N. SINGH AND P.B. SAWANT, JJ.) 
Service Law-Civil Servant-Confidential reports-Adverse 
remarks-Representation against adverse remarks-Rejection of rep-
resentation-Held rejection of representation neither adversely affects 
any vested right of Government servant nor does visit him with any civil 
consequences-In the absence of any statutory rule or provision the com-
petent authority is under no obligation to record or communicate 
reasons for its decision to Government servant. 
Confidential report-Remarks about integrity of employee, 
"Nothing adverse has come to notice"-Held neutral and not adverse in 
nature. 
Administrative Law-Administrative authority-Natural justice 
-Duty to give reasons. 
A 
B 
c 
D 
The respondent, a Section Officer in the office of the Chief Con-
troller of Import and Exports, was communicated adverse remarks for 
E 
the year 1984. He made a representation against the adverse remarks 
but the same was rejected by the Ministry of Commerce by its order 
dated 6.1.1986. Thereafter be made a Memorial to the President and the 
Government. by its order dated 14.8.86 partially expunged the adverse 
remarks. The respondent filed a petition before the Central Adminis-
trative Tribunal challenging the order rejecting bis representation on F 
the ground that it did not contain any reasons. The Tribunal by its 
order dated 27. 7 .87 quashed both the orders dated 6.1.86 as well as 
14.8.86 by holding that the orders were vitiated in law in the absence of 
reasons. In appeal to this Court by the Union of India, it was contended 
on behalf of the respondent that the principles of natural justice require 
the superior authority to record reasons in rejecting the Government G 
servant's representation made against the adverse remarks as the order 
of rejection alTected the respondent's right. 
Allowing the appeal, this Court, 
HELD: 1. The superior authority while considering the represen-
H 
451 
452 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1991] 2 S.C.R. 
A tation or a Government servant against adverse remarks, is not 
required by law to act judicially, it is under no legal obligation to record 
or communicate reasons for its decision to the Government servant. 
There is no rule or administrative order for recording reasons in reject-
ing such a representation. In the absence of any statutory rule or statu. 
tory instructions requiring the competent authority to record reasons in 
B - rejecting a representation made by a Government servant against the 
adverse entries the competent authority is not under any obligation to 
record reasons. The decision, rejecting such a representation does not 
adversely affect any vested right or the Government servant nor does it 
visit him with any civil consequences. It does not'mean that the compe-
tent authority has licence to act arbitrarily, he must act in a fair and 
C 
just manner. He is required to consider the questions raised by the 
Government servant and examine the same, in the light of the com-
ments made by the officer awarding the adverse entries and the officer 
counter-signing the Confidential Reports. If the representation is 
rejected after its consideration in a fair and just manner, the order of 
rejection wonld not be rendered illegal merely on the ground of absence 
D 
of reasons. In many cases having regard to inf"mite variations of 
circumstances it may not be possible to disclose reasons, for the opinion 
formed about the work and conduct or character of the Government 
servant. However, it does not mean that the administrative authority is 
at liberty to pass orders without there being any reasons for the same. 
In Governmental functioning before any order is issued the matter is 
E 
generally considered at various levels and the reasons and opinions are 
contained in the notes on the me. The reasons contained in the me 
enable the competent authority to formulate its opinion. If the order as 
communicated to the Government servant rejecting the representation 
does not contain any reasons the order cannot be held to be bad in law. 
If such an order is challenged in a court of law it is always open to the 
,F 
competent authority to place the reasons before the Court which may 
have led to the rejection of the representation. It is always open to an 
administrative authority to pFoduce evidence aU-unde before the court 
to justify its action. [459G·H, 460A, E-F·H, 46IA-B] 
0 
Gurdial Singh F

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