J.N.THAIYAM Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India has been preferred with the following prayers:

(2.) Insofar as the prayer at Paragraph7(B) is concerned, it is submitted by Mr.Vaibhav A. Vyas, learned advocate for the petitioner, that this prayer no longer survives in view of the fact that the adverse entry recorded in the Annual Confidential Report of the petitioner for the period from 12.08.2006 to 31.03.2007 regarding his integrity, has been expunged by respondent No.2 by passing the order dated 03.02.2012. This aspect has also been confirmed in the affidavitinreply filed by respondent No.1. The only prayer now remaining in the petition is for quashing and setting aside the adverse entry recorded in the Annual Confidential Report of the petitioner for the period from 01.04.2006 to 11.08.2006, whereby the Reviewing Officer has downgraded the assessment of the Reporting Officer by holding the petitioner to "an average officer". During the period covered under Prayer7(A), there was also an adverse entry regarding the integrity of the petitioner which has been expunged as noted hereinabove.

(3.) Briefly stated, the relevant facts of the case are that the petitioner joined services on the post of Assistant Social Welfare Officer (ClassIII) on 27.04.1982. He was promoted on the next higher post of Social Welfare Officer (ClassII) on 01.08.2001. His date of birth being 27.08.1954, the petitioner has superannuated from service on 31.08.2012. Two adverse entries were recorded in the Annual Confidential Report of the petitioner from the period 01.04.2006 to 11.08.2006. Out of the two, one was with regard to his integrity and the other was regarding the downgrading by the Reviewing Officer as 'Average'. As already stated hereinabove, the adverse entry regarding the integrity of the petitioner has been expunged, therefore, only the entry whereby the petitioner has been assessed as 'Average' remains to be adjudicated. The Annual Confidential Report of the petitioner for the period from 12.08.2006 to 31.03.2007 also contained an adverse entry with regard to his integrity which has been expunged. Aggrieved by the assessment of the Reviewing Officer as 'Average', the petitioner has approached this Court. Under the circumstances, the Court will, therefore, confine its adjudication only to the adverse entry assessing the petitioner as 'Average'.