The Supreme Court has ruled that employers can examine an employee’s entire service record while deciding whether the individual should be retained in service or compulsorily retired. The judgment clarifies that adverse entries made before an employee’s promotion do not lose relevance during such assessments.
A Bench comprising Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra and Justice Shree Chandrashekhar held that the “washed-off theory” — which means that adverse remarks or negative entries in an employee’s record are ignored after a promotion while considering the employee for further promotions — applies only to promotion-related decisions. The Court clarified that this principle does not apply when assessing an employee’s suitability for compulsory retirement or continued retention in service.
The ruling came while dismissing the appeal of a former Central Industrial Security Force (CISF) officer who challenged his compulsory retirement. The appellant argued that adverse remarks recorded before his promotions should not have been considered while evaluating his suitability for continued service.
The officer had joined the CISF as an Assistant Sub-Inspector in 1982 and was promoted to Sub-Inspector in 1990 and Inspector in 2003. After attaining the age of 50, his case was reviewed by the Internal Screening Committee, which found him unsuitable for further retention in service. The Review Committee upheld the decision, resulting in his compulsory retirement. The Delhi High Court had earlier refused to interfere with the order.
Upholding the High Court’s decision, the Supreme Court relied on its earlier ruling in Rajasthan State Road Transport Corporation and Others v. Babu Lal Jangir (2013). The Court reiterated that while adverse entries preceding a promotion may be treated as having lost significance for future promotions, the same principle does not apply when determining whether an employee should continue in service.
The Bench observed that authorities assessing compulsory retirement are expected to evaluate the employee’s complete service history rather than only recent performance. Consequently, the Court held that the screening committee was justified in considering the appellant’s entire record, including adverse material predating his promotions, and dismissed the appeal in Sushil Sharma v. Union of India and Others (2026 LiveLaw (SC) 768).
