P. SIVANANDI versus RAJEEV KUMAR & ORS.

P. SIVANANDI versus RAJEEV KUMAR & ORS.

An officer cannot be prejudiced simply because his superior officers delayed writing or reviewing an ACR. The ACR forms a part of the service record, and even if written beyond the prescribed period, it must be considered for promotion. The prescription for writing an ACR is directory, not mandatory, and its exclusion solely on account of delay is not justified.

Parties
Appellant: P. Sivanandi; Respondents: Rajeev Kumar & Ors.
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
02 February 2017
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Final Judgment
Outcome
Appeals allowed
Legal Topics
Promotion, Annual Confidential Report (acr), Delay in Writing Reports, Validity of Acrs for Promotion
Service Law Promotion Annual Confidential Report (acr) Delay in Writing Reports Validity of Acrs for Promotion

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

P. Sivanandi

Appellant

Rajeev Kumar & Ors.

Respondents

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Final Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Annual Confidential Report (ACR) written after the prescribed period can be considered as part of the service record for promotion?
  2. 2 Whether delay in writing ACR by superior officers can prejudice the officer for promotion?

Ratio Decidendi

An officer cannot be prejudiced simply because his superior officers delayed writing or reviewing an ACR. The ACR forms a part of the service record, and even if written beyond the prescribed period, it must be considered for promotion. The prescription for writing an ACR is directory, not mandatory, and its exclusion solely on account of delay is not justified.

Court Disposition

Appeals allowed

Orders

  • Order of Madras High Court set aside
  • Appellant entitled to all consequential benefits