Dev Dutt vs Union Of India & Ors on 12 May, 2008
8. It is quite evident from the above discussion that the controversy is a
limited one - i.e. whether the petitioner is entitled to promotion to the post of DIG
through a review DPC. The review DPC in question was directed after the order of
the Supreme Court dated 12.02.2013. The petitioner was informed on 02.07.2013
that based upon his past records, i.e. 1982-83 onwards, he was found unfit for
promotion as DIG. The petitioner claims that the ACR grading of "good" was
never communicated to him and that inasmuch as it constitutes a drop in his
performance. The lack of communication meant that he was deprived the
opportunity to represent against it. More fundamentally, it is contended that the
SSB's stand that another year of original ACR gradings do not exist on record and
has been weeded out is suspicious and unacceptable because without such records,
review DPC itself could not have been held. The petitioner's contentions with
respect to the law declared in Dev Dutt (supra) cannot be disturbed. Equally, it
could be disputed that for the post of DIG, the benchmark indicated is five "very
good". The relevant period is 1982-83 to 1987-88.