ANIL KUMAR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

ANIL KUMAR versus UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

CSIR was bound to follow the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Dev Dutt’s case regarding communication of ACRs. The failure to communicate ACR entries deprived the appellant of the opportunity to make representation for financial upgradation and promotion. The Tribunal and High Court erred in concluding otherwise; the appellant must be granted an opportunity to submit representation for relevant ACRs, and if ACRs are upgraded, his case must be reconsidered for financial upgradation and promotion.

Parties
Appellant: Anil Kumar; Respondents: Union of India and Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From the High Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; judgment of the High Court set aside.
Legal Topics
Financial Upgradation, Promotion, Annual Confidential Reports (acrs), Communicating Acrs, MACP Scheme, Departmental Promotion Committee, Administrative Law
Service Law Financial Upgradation Promotion Annual Confidential Reports (acrs) Communicating Acrs MACP Scheme Departmental Promotion Committee Administrative Law

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Anil Kumar

Appellant

Union of India and Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Supreme Court Decision on Appeal From the High Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the failure to communicate ACR entries that do not meet the benchmark for financial upgradation violates applicable rules and principles.
  2. 2 Whether autonomous bodies like CSIR are bound by Supreme Court judgments regarding communication of ACRs.

Ratio Decidendi

CSIR was bound to follow the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Dev Dutt’s case regarding communication of ACRs. The failure to communicate ACR entries deprived the appellant of the opportunity to make representation for financial upgradation and promotion. The Tribunal and High Court erred in concluding otherwise; the appellant must be granted an opportunity to submit representation for relevant ACRs, and if ACRs are upgraded, his case must be reconsidered for financial upgradation and promotion.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; judgment of the High Court set aside.

Orders

  • Appellant must be allowed to submit representation regarding ACRs for concerned years within four weeks.
  • Respondents to consider representation and communicate outcome to appellant within two months.