An employee who had become eligible for a promotion to the role of principal private secretary on 12 May, 2013, retired in July 2013 without being aware that his promotion had been denied and the reasons behind the denial.
The order denying the promotion had not been conveyed to him. Therefore, he approached the Registrar General of the High Court with a representation. The Registrar General communicated to the Principal District Judge that the appellant was not appointed ex-post facto to the position of Principal Private Secretary, Class-I because of some adverse remarks in his confidential report for the period from 18 May, 2012, to 31 March, 2013. Another reason for the denial of promotion was that he had received an ‘average’ rating in his merit-cum-efficiency report for the preceding five years.
The Court did not approve of the casual manner in which the matter had been handled, especially when it involved the recording of entries pertaining to confidential reports. Not only did the Court note that the confidential reports for the period 2009 to 2010 were missing, the Court was aghast that the same had been taken into account to deny promotion to the said employee, who wasn’t even aware of the negative remarks. There were no records to suggest that the so-called adverse remarks on the employee’s reports had been conveyed to him.
No explanation was offered for the delay in communicating the crucial decision/information to the employee. What should have been conveyed to him in 2014, was only communicated in 2017.
The Court ruled that employees have the right to be made aware of “the orders/communications/decisions immediately, which jeopardize their careers or service benefits, so that they can take proper recourse questioning them.”
The Court allowed the appeal and ordered the respondents to promote, upgrade, or appoint the appellant to the post of Principal Private Secretary, Class-I, retroactively with effect from the date that he became eligible for the same.
