ARUN KUMAR UNIYAL Vs. CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE- TRIBUNAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN a decision of Union of India, it has been provided that if A.C.R. grading of its employees are 'good', the same need not to be communicated. Petitioner, an employee of Union of India, received good entries during the relevant years except one 'very good' entry in one of those years. According to the said decision of Union of India, the good entries were not communicated to the petitioner. Because the petitioner received good entries and only one very good entry during the relevant years, petitioner was not given non-functional selection grade, inasmuch as other similarly situated employees, who were also considered alongwith the petitioner, had more very good entries during the relevant years. In consequence, juniors to the petitioner have been given a better service benefit and the petitioner has been denied.

(2.) PETITIONER , accordingly, approached the Central Administrative Tribunal. Noting that there was no requirement to inform the petitioner as regards good entries, it was held there was no interferable action on the part of Union of India and, since petitioner got less very good entries than others, there was no scope of interference with the subject matter of complain before the Tribunal.

(3.) THERE is no dispute that there is a decision of the Central Government that it shall not be necessary to communicate good remarks, but there is no decision of the Central Government that 'good' remark would be treated as 'very good' or that there is no difference between 'good' and 'very good' and accordingly, a person receiving 'good' has no chance of losing out in his future career. That being the situation and as the fact above has disclosed, despite a person getting good remarks, he may lose out for he has not received 'very good' remarks and, accordingly, it is a requirement of law as also under the Constitutional mandate contained in Article 14 of the Constitution, to communicate to the petitioner that he has received 'good' and, not 'very good' and, accordingly, there is a possibility that he may suffer in his further progression. In this connection, reference has been made to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, rendered in the case of Dev Dutt Vs. Union of India and others, reported in (2008) 8 SCC 725.