Case Note & Summary
The dispute originated from the appellant's grievance regarding non-promotion from Deputy Manager (Scale III) to Manager (Scale IV) in an insurance company. The appellant had previously challenged non-promotion for 2014 through writ petitions before the High Court, which were dismissed. The Supreme Court, in a judgment dated 10 July 2019, held that non-communication of Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APAR) for relevant years violated principles established in Dev Dutt vs Union of India and Sukhdev Singh vs Union of India, and directed communication of uncommunicated entries and consideration of the appellant's representation. The present appeal concerned non-promotion for subsequent years 2015 and 2016. The High Court, in its impugned judgment dated 6 August 2018, dismissed the writ petition, erroneously observing that previous orders regarding 2014 promotion had attained finality since they were not challenged. The appellant contended that this was incorrect as the Supreme Court had indeed addressed those orders. The Supreme Court found that promotion grievances for 2014, 2015 and 2016 involved overlapping parameters under the 2006 promotion policy, particularly APARs reflecting work record. Since the 2014 grievance was pending before the Delhi High Court following the Supreme Court's earlier directions, and the High Court had made a factual error regarding challenge to previous orders, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgment. The Court directed transfer of the writ petition from the Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court to Delhi High Court for joint hearing with the pending petition regarding 2014 promotion, while expressly keeping all rights and contentions open and not expressing any opinion on the merits of the 2015-2016 claim.
Headnote
A) Service Law - Promotion Grievances - Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APAR) Communication - Non-communication of APAR entries violates natural justice principles established in Dev Dutt vs Union of India and Sukhdev Singh vs Union of India - The Supreme Court had previously directed communication of uncommunicated APAR entries for 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 taken into account for 2014-15 promotion exercise, allowing the appellant to submit representation - This established that failure to communicate APAR entries is contrary to law (Paras 6-7). B) Service Law - Promotion Policy - Promotion Parameters - 2006 Promotion Policy parameters include written test, work record, seniority, and interview - APARs reflecting work record constitute a reckonable parameter in promotion exercises - Since APARs affect multiple promotion years, grievances across years cannot be considered in isolation due to overlap in parameters (Paras 11). C) Civil Procedure - Transfer of Cases - Article 226 Constitution of India - Supreme Court transfers writ petition from Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court to Delhi High Court for joint hearing - The Court directed transfer of Service Bench No 10902 of 2016 to Delhi High Court to be heard together with Writ Petition Civil No 44 of 2021 pending before Delhi High Court - This ensures related promotion grievances for 2014, 2015 and 2016 are considered together expeditiously (Paras 12-13). D) Judicial Review - Factual Error - High Court's erroneous observation that previous orders attained finality - The High Court incorrectly stated that judgments dated 6 October 2016 and 17 January 2017 were not challenged before higher forum - In reality, these became subject matter of Supreme Court decision dated 10 July 2019 - This factual error warranted setting aside the impugned judgment (Paras 9-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court erred in dismissing the appellant's writ petition regarding non-promotion for 2015 and 2016, particularly in light of overlapping issues with the pending 2014 promotion grievance and the High Court's erroneous observation about finality of previous orders
Final Decision
The Supreme Court set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court dated 6 August 2018. The Court directed: (i) transfer of the writ petition (Service Bench No 10902 of 2016) from Lucknow Bench of Allahabad High Court to Delhi High Court; (ii) the transferred petition to be heard and decided together with Writ Petition Civil No 44 of 2021 pending before Delhi High Court; (iii) the setting aside not to be construed as expression of opinion on merits of 2015-2016 claim; (iv) Registrar (Judicial) at Lucknow Bench to ensure transfer of records. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
Law Points
- Non-communication of Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APAR) violates principles of natural justice
- promotion grievances across multiple years with overlapping parameters should be considered together
- High Court's factual error regarding challenge to previous orders warrants setting aside judgment
