High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCWP/24836/2025allowed

Roshan Sharma v. Union Of India And Others

2026-01-23Mr. Justice Sandeep Moudgil11 pages

"#$%&'()&*&)+&#,' -! ! !

"#$%&'(.),',"'/&#,' ! ! !

"#$%&'(".0,1#&#,' ! ! !

2&(2&),.&)1(3+&,)4"005"#$%&'(

"00 !

&0163'.),',"'/&%&'(,44"005"#$%&'(1'#)&1*,'*7341'6

8 9:; !

< ;< ;;

****

" !

#$!# <1'#&&. ,"#$307 ! %&'

()!

*+!

#,,- $! !./ ! . 0!. + .

. . !#

' !

& # ,1,,2& ,1,2% &&' 3!. ,4 1, ,1,5% &4'*6 ). 7 ( !

6 /8 $ !

9 . 7 $

)! / #./3!#* %,'

: !# !*

/ #6 / +. 99$

%,$' / (;

+!# * 99$

- 2 - $

(;

# < ##6 *

,1,,-,2/ *.

2 =%> .?'

/ 6 />@0##A!.A 6B? ,1&4-,1 ,1,5-,= 2C 6 !*# / #

*6 .# 6*

60 * %2'

* /! .. 6 *! # *6 . % D '8B

. .

*! / ! / B / . 8!+!

*6 .

. ,1,,9,2 #6 .

! # 0

7#// .. %5'

B#/

E .7*6 ..

* . #/ . #E 9&7 ! ! # !

!*6 !

.1& ,1,,2& ,1,2 / !/# .$

!* /# +. + / ! / / ! * # 6 /* ##

- 3 -

. + #! 6 . /

%='

#6 .! #6 0 # 6 !.!

6 ,1,,9,2 /###.* # F@0##F F!.F ## B . 6 6 % 9&2 9&C'! *6 / *!## F

6 ,1,,9,1,2#6 !

# .

. #6 2 = #6 /! !. 6 #!

/ . /9$! *6 . ! 6 / + # !.. #* !

F / !

%-'

# # * + >=? ##6 0#! 8 $ /! 0 .

.#.#6

)! * /0# 6#/ 6 ! # + # !

.. 7 .

!.!,1,-

*# )!. ! )!

,1,,9,2*0!.

%C'

#6 &5 && ,1,= * # *6 !# # $

A ;($ (;

< ;!

+!# / *

;($ * . ! *6

- 4 - !#6 ## ! / 3! / ;($ 1& 1, ,1,,

5= ;# /

# 3! 9

( ( ;#AG $

/ 0 # &C 1D ,1,2 % 9&1' .

! # 6 * @0

! #6*! ,2 .

%D'

!* ## #!.

/ # #!

/ ; . % 9&2' *)#6

( . ##/

$AB8

/!##6/ .

;

8B "

1= 1, ,1,& !#.( . ##/6*#9 ! # !* .*;($9# !

#6 .

!/# !##/ ! . #H##.*!* 6

( . ##/ .!

%4'

: !# !

. 1& ,1,, 2& ,1,2 ;($ ;!

/*6 .

+ (#6# $

;($ // !

.= 2,/ + . . !

! !

/ .

. +/ #6 /. .##!

6 *

- 5 - ! ( # !*# # !

. ,D6 # 5&6

!A ##,,6 !## ## #/ #! !## ! !6

!# # # #*#6

!#9## # / #*#

# / + ! * #

%&1'

,1,,9,2/ !#6# 9

G #,& 1D ,1,2 / +/#. #6 !* #

21 1D ,1,2% 9&D'

/ ) *6 ! 6. 0!.

+!/ #!

#)! .! * ) ! # /

*#/8 (&5 1= ,114% 9,='

/ 1, ,1&5 % 9&C'

/ . ##6 !*3! A##.

##/H 6 ,1,= /

6 6 ,1,- / *6 8 $ ,1 1- ,1,= % 9,1' #. / 99$

%B8'

*! / >"<(? *! ** + 3! > 6B?# !#

/ +6 8 ( ! ,2 1C ,114 % 9,,' / . !

. /.! !#

- 6 - .# . !#A 6*!

#6/ +.!

%&&'

# !# . !. %&,'

!! # 6 !*3!,1,,9,2 7

. >@0##?

>!.? > 6B?*

9&2 9&C ( /!

. 6 3! / ! / # . $

/ . #. 6 > 9&?

!. . #

##.*6 #!.! ! /#/ .

! # .

%&2'

( ! $!

. ##6 * ##.

* . + !#. / !6 *6

. .! + /! 6 !# ##6/ ) 6 /#/ <##/. 8# .$!

!""#!

! $%& #'( )* +,%-, ,D 1D ,1&, +. + > ! /

+..! +? !*/ !###

!!#

/ !# / + # ( # )!.

! 9

- 7 - "6. The dart board speaks it all. For all the years in question, except the year 2007, the petitioner has been graded on the seven facets, mostly 'Very Good'; on some occasion 'Good' and on some occasion 'Outstanding'. The remarks for the year 2007 are a complete mismatch. The result is that for the years 1999, 2000, 2006 and 2008 the overall ACR grading of the petitioner is 'Good' and that for the years 1996, 1997, 1998, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2010 and 2011 the ACR grading is 'Very Good' and for the years 2002, 2005 and 2009 is 'Outstanding', for the year 2007 it is 'Average'.

7. Now, it is not possible that for 11 years a person is either 'Very Good' or 'Outstanding' and then for one year he drops to 'Average' and then regains 'Very Good' and 'Outstanding' in the next three years.

8. Let us illustrate one trait. The trait No.(iii) i.e. 'Power of Expression'. This is not a trait which is acquired and lost overnight. The dart board would reveal that for this trait the petitioner has been rated all throughout as 'Good', 'Very Good' or 'Outstanding', but for the year 2007 the officer has written that petitioner's power of expression is not effective.

9. There is obviously a problem, and the problem appears to be as disclosed by the petitioner; that the Commandant under whom he was working i.e. M.P.Singh was accepting lower quality of ration for troops and the petitioner being a member of the Tendering Opening/Condemnation Board had wanted samples to be obtained and in retaliation, the Commandant Shri M.P.Singh, made entries reflecting petitioner in a poor light.

10. We are pained to note that in the impugned memorandum dated February 09, 2012, the Competent Authority has rejected the representation of the petitioner against the adverse grading awarded to the petitioner and the overall grading 'Average' for the year 2007, oblivious of the fact that a wrong against the petitioner stands stark in the ACR grading for the year 2007.

- 8 -

11. The dart, shot at the dart board, is bound to see the bull's eye i.e. the offending comments noted in the ACR grading of the petitioner because of their inherent strength and character to attract the dart to the board where the ACR gradings stand noted.

12. We allow the writ petition and strike down the ACR grading awarded to the petitioner for the year 2007, and since the Competent Authority has totally misapplied its mind, being of the opinion that no useful purpose would be served for the Competent Authority to be directed to reconsider the ACR grading for the year 2007, we declare that said year's ACR grading be excluded while considering the entitlement of the petitioner for promotion. Highlighting that at the DPC which met somewhere in the year 2008, the petitioner was superseded on account of the below benchmark ACR grading for the year 2007, we direct that a Review DPC be held and while considering the ACR gradings of the petitioner, to exclude the ACR grading for the year 2007 and instead take into account the ACR grading of one year back.

Needful be done within 12 weeks from today. Needless to state, if the petitioner is found fit for promotion, he be promoted with all consequential benefits of seniority, pay fixation etc. except backwages being not paid, on the principle of petitioner not having shouldered the responsibility for the higher post; but all other benefits of notional promotion from a back-date which would include revised pay fixation would be given effect to."

( 8# . $!

# / / # . / +,%!

,0 $11 / (;

/ #6 > 6 BA!.?

/ # / !#6. ##!

. >1?

!./ !/ *#!

. 6 / ! ! # !* ( 8# . $!

! * ! 9#

- 9 - /.

+ / 7 / . * > #0.?

* 6 *6 * !# #6 0 # *6 . ! / #6 ! #6

/ . ( $!

#!/ .! !!. !

#+*)0! .

0!. +>H ?.

%&='

+ 2% -, '

) .34$%)!

!! 1 !

,0 ! $!

!# # .#*#/9* + $ / 7 /> 6 B? /! !6 * ##/ 6 * . !

(

$> 6B? ,11=91-,11-91C *! ,11C91D . /. ! !#6 .

#6>B?

//*#/* + B* #

6. !.

%&-'

6* !

! 9

G # / / ! 8 ( &5 1= ,114 *! 0

# !

# !*#6 * 6 6 6 $A

/ * .

##6 * > ?

! *

! !*##. *! / #!

#)! !*#

- 10 - %&C'

( ## 6! 6##. !6 * !

#*! ! 0 / .

. *)#6 )! /

7 ## #.//.

*09.

G *0.

.9!

*6. ! / /

. 7 /!# #+*)6 ** !#! %&D'

#6 * + > 6B?# #

/ + 8 ( !,2 1C ,114 / ! >"<(? *6 8 $ 6 6 ,1,- *! ,1,,9,2

* + ( .!

#.#6 6

! ##. !

,1,,9,2 *69 .! #/&*6#+ *) ! ! * # ! * +9* 8 $ ! #6 .

. * ##/ 7

#&5&-$! 3! # #6 # * #+

# ! ##/)! + +!

/!# !# !# #6/ +

9 %&4'

. # * ##. !

# .

*! #6 ! ##. * . . ! 6 #+##.

- 11 - #6

! +.!##/

*!* 6.

%,1'

/*! / ##/ ( + ##.

.2 = 7

1& ,1,,2& ,1,2% 9&&' *60!.

##*+! 6!

$3!#6 ,4 1, ,1,5% 9&4'

). 7 # ( /8 $ / 9 7 . # 6 6

*6 . .0!.

*6 .

,1,,9,2# /

#6 . !. .

. # !

* +#! ! .

/ ##3!#* #!. 6

)! / / I-J !#7!# #

%,&'

.#6

! ! #

<1'#&&. ,"#$30

"#$&

1. Whether speaking/reasoned?

Yes/No

2. Whether reportable?

Yes/No