RAMESH KUMAR PATWARI Vs. UNION OF INDIA
HIGH COURT OF JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Ramesh Kumar Patwari
UNION OF INDIA
Click here to view full judgement.
(1.) THE petitioner is a member of the armed forces. It is admitted case of the parties that he was enrolled in Ladakh Scout on 31.12.80. ¢He
remained posted in 213, Transit Camp, Jammu from 20.10.91 until he was
relieved on 3.9.94.
(2.) AS per promotion policy effective from 1.195, the petitioner required 5 regimental reports before he could be considered for further
promotion. It appears the petitioner was having only 3 regimental reports. The petitioner was short of
2 regimental reports before he could be considered for promotion. He was accordingly transferred to Ladakh Scout in March, 1994.
(3.) THE grievance of the petitioner is that although he was transferred with the specific purposes of earning regimental reports yet
he was not relieved till 3.9.94. Since Anual Confidential Reports (A*CRs.
are initiated in the month of October every year under the existing
rules, a person must have served under the Initiating Officer for minimum
90 days before he could earn his ACRs. Since the petitioner was relieved in September, therefore, he could not earn regimental reports. However,
since he had served in the Transit Camp, therefore, his ACRs were written
by the concerned officer under whom he has served, he came to know about
the adverse entries in the ACR for the year 1994. While he was posted in
the Transit Camp, when the remarks of the Initiating Officer" he knows
the rules and regulations but uses them for personal manipulation" were
conveyed to him. This pen picture being against the norms, was challenged
by him before the competent authority and were expunged by the General
Officer Commanding. However, the grading awarded to the petitioner was
not conveyed to him. He seeks quashing of the ACRs for the year 94,
because these were not conveyed to him and since average grading is
adverse, therefore, it could not be acted upon. His further grievance is
that he has been ignored for promotion only because of this adverse
entry. The relief claimed by him is that he should be promoted, ignoring
the ACRs for the year 1994 and on the basis of ACRs earned by him since
1992 to 1993 and 1995
The stand of the respondents is that the ACRs of the petitioner were written as per assessment made by the Officer, who
had an opportunity to assess his performance. Since, he found his
performance lacking, therefore, he was awarded average grading. It is
further submitted that although pen picture drawn by the Initiating
Officer was expunged by the Brig. Jasbir Singh, he agreed with the box
grading while accepting the statutory complaint. Further, the respondents
have justified the grading of the petitioner on the basis of his
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.