Adverse remarks in ACR can be quashed if smack of malice, rules CAT

The Chandigarh Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has said that adverse remarks recorded in an ACR can be quashed only if they are the result of malice, ill will or spite of an officer towards the officer commented upon. In such cases, when the prejudiced mindset behind writing an ACR is evident, the interference of the court is warranted.

The Bench said the manner in which Respondent No. 3 reviewed the ACR was enough evidence to show that he was hell-bent on spoiling the applicant’s career by downgrading her ACR.

The Bench made the observation while giving judgment in favour of Enna Passi, Senior Architect of the Central Public Works Department, Chandigarh.

In an application filed through advocate Rohit Seth, Passi said she had been working in the department since June 23, 2014, and Respondent No. 3 (Prabhaker Kumar Verma) was her reporting officer. She said Verma made below benchmark grading in her ACR for 2014-15 and 2015-16, but the reviewing officer upgraded her ACR to 'very good', which was accepted by the department.

For the period April 1, 2016, to November 30, 2016, Verma again graded her ACR  below benchmark.

Later, he was promoted and posted as ADG, Northern Region-I, Chandigarh, from November 23, 2016, to November 30, 2016, only for eight days. He reviewed her ACR as a reviewing officer, agreeing with his own report.

She said he could not have reviewed her ACR for the period from April 1, 2016, to November 30, 2016, being less than 90 days. He had also written her ACR for this period, therefore, he also could not review his own report.

After hearing the arguments, the Bench said the manner in which Respondent No. 3 reviewed the ACR was enough evidence to show that he was hell-bent on spoiling the applicant’s career by downgrading her ACR.

Apparently, the action of Respondent No. 3 was not fair and seemed to be done with malice, hence, the same was held to be illegal.

The tribunal said the adverse entries be expunged and the Director General of Works, Central Public Works Department, was directed to ignore the ACR for the period for the purpose of grant of any kind of service benefit, including promotion, to which she was otherwise eligible.