case of the applicant that he was conveyed below benchmark ACRs for the year 2004 and 2006 requesting him to submit his representations ... impugned Memorandum dated 01.08.2011 that the benefit of representation against below benchmark ACR grading cannot be granted to him as the review DPC has been
urged is that earlier there was no provision for communicating below benchmark ACRs, and that only adverse remarks were required to be communicated ... that does not mean that if an employee had below benchmark ACRs prior to declaration of law, the same need not have been communicated
which the applicant represented against the below benchmark ACRs which were considered and the grading was upgraded to Very Good. It is further the case ... have any opportunity although there were many more below benchmark ACRs of the applicant which the 2nd respondent had not communicated to him. This
Shri Saurabh Ahuja, learned counsel representing the applicant, is that below benchmark ACRs of an employee have to be communicated to him, as ruled ... considered below benchmark, and the case law as has developed is that such below benchmark ACRs have to be communicated. The observations of the Apex
ACRs graded as Good and all other ACRs were only Average or Fair. It was further noted that he did not meet the benchmark ... ACRs by countersigning officer being without reason/justification, especially when no work gone to countersigning officer.
g. To treat the ACRs good (required benchmark
days of such
communication. It may be noted that only below benchmark
ACR for the period relevant to promotion need be sent. There ... need to send below benchmark ACRs of other years.
2. As per existing instructions, representations against the
remarks or for upgradation of the final grading
days of such communication. It may
be noted that only below benchmark ACR for the period relevant to
promotion need be sent. There ... need to send below benchmark
ACRs of other years.
2. As per existing instructions, representations against the
remarks or for upgradation of the final grading
done by the competent Selection Committee/DPC. In case of below benchmark of ACRs, the ratio set in Dev Dutts case is applicable ... examined by this Tribunal. Since the applicant meets the benchmark of Good and ACRs are not adverse, there was no need to communicate his assessment
Shri Brijesh Gupta vs Union Of India Through on 25 May, 2012
Central Administrative Tribunal
considered opinion that the process of recording of ACRs, rejection of representations against below benchmark grading and their consideration by the DPC suffer from several ... altogether ignore the below benchmark ACRs and consider his ACRs for the preceding years which were upto the benchmark. In the present case, since
