Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 6 of 6 (0.19 seconds)
R. K. Mishra vs Union Of India And Ors on 12 April, 2017 cites

Dev Dutt vs Union Of India & Ors on 12 May, 2008

In Sukhdev Singh v. Union of India & Others, (2013) 9 SCC 566, the Supreme Court reiterated and held that the ratio expressed in Dev Dutt (Supra) that every entry in the ACR must be communicated is legally sound and helps in achieving threefold objectives. It helps public servant to work harder and achieve more and better results. Secondly, he is made aware of the entry in the W.P.(C) 4855/2014 Page 7 of 8 ACR and if he feels dissatisfied, it enables him to make a representation for upgradation. Lastly, it brings transparency in recording the remarks relating to a public servant and the system becomes more conforming to the principles of natural justice.
Supreme Court of India Cites 17 - Cited by 1116 - M Katju - Full Document

Indira Gandhi Airport Tdi Karamchari ... vs Union Of India & Ors on 18 December, 2009

"17. In our opinion, every entry in the A.C.R. of a public servant must be communicated to him within a reasonable period, whether it is a poor, fair, average, good or very good entry. This is because non-communication of such an entry may adversely affect the employee in two ways : (1) Had the entry been communicated to him he would know about the assessment of his work and conduct by his superiors, which would enable him to improve his work in future (2) He would have an opportunity of making a representation against the entry if he feels it is unjustified, and pray for its upgradation. Hence non-communication of an entry is arbitrary, and it has been held by the Constitution Bench decision of this Court in Maneka http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 11 of 23 11 Gandhi vs. Union of India (supra) that arbitrariness violates Article 14 of the Constitution.
Delhi High Court Cites 39 - Cited by 5 - S Muralidhar - Full Document

Sukhdev Singh vs Union Of India & Ors on 23 April, 2013

In Sukhdev Singh v. Union of India & Others, (2013) 9 SCC 566, the Supreme Court reiterated and held that the ratio expressed in Dev Dutt (Supra) that every entry in the ACR must be communicated is legally sound and helps in achieving threefold objectives. It helps public servant to work harder and achieve more and better results. Secondly, he is made aware of the entry in the W.P.(C) 4855/2014 Page 7 of 8 ACR and if he feels dissatisfied, it enables him to make a representation for upgradation. Lastly, it brings transparency in recording the remarks relating to a public servant and the system becomes more conforming to the principles of natural justice.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 251 - Full Document
1