ANAND ROY Vs. UNION OF INDIA AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Mr. R. Jha, learned counsel appearing for and on behalf of the petitioner.

(2.) LEARNED counsel Mr. R. Jha, submits that after Entry in the ACR petitioner was not informed in time as a result, he could not make any representation to the authority. Subsequently, when he approached this Court vide WP(C) No. 116(SH) 2009, then only he has been provided with the Entry of the ACR of 2005 -06. Thereafter he made a representation but it was simply rejected without appropriate checking. Learned counsel also contended that other colleagues of the petitioner had already been promoted but for the reason best known to the respondents, petitioner was not promoted and ultimately he had to retire on 1.8.2010.

(3.) AFTER hearing the submission advanced by the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the firm view that where a person got 'Average' or 'Outstanding' whatever the case may be, authority concerned is bound to communicate the Entry of the ACR of the person concerned immediately. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Sukhdev Singh versus Union of India and Others : (2013) 9 SCC 566 at Para 4 and 8 has held as under: