Writing of Annual Confidential Reports (ACR) in respect of Central Health Services Officers

No.A.28011/01/2010-CHS.V
Government of India
Ministry of Health & Family Welfare

Nirman Bhawan, New Delhi,
Dated: 28^th July, 2010

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

Subject: - Instructions regarding Writing of Annual Confidential Reports (ACR) in respect of Central Health Services Officers - reg.

The undersigned is directed to draw attention to the enclose copy of DOPTs Circular O.M. No.21011/1/2010 Estt.A dated 13.4.2010 whereby DOP&T ahs issued fresh instructions inter-alia stating that in case, an employee is to be considered for promotion and his ACR prior 2008-09 contain final a copy of the relevant ACR for his representation, before such ACRs are placed before the DPC/ only the below bench mark ACRs for the period relevant to promotion need be sent to the concerned officers."

2. In pursuance to this several representation from the affected officers have been received. while considering the representations from the affected officers viz-a-viz, it has been observed that while writing the ACRs of the officers, the Reporting Officer has simply marked against each Column as "Good" and this has been accordingly made the final Assessment as "Good", without giving any reason for making this grading. For instance, under Col. "Please comment to write at some length, while making the Assessment. Likewise, the overall assessment where the direction is that strength and shortcomings of the officer should be reported upon, even here the total assessment is simply given as "Good".

3. This has created confusion in considering the representations of the concerned Officer for up gradation of the grading in the ACRs. Since the Grading given in the ACRs affect the future promotion /s of the concerned officers, all Reporting/Reviewing Officers are directed to apply their mind while recording entries, with the full understanding that these entries will be extremely crucial in determining the future career of the officers in the service.

(PAWAN KUMAR)
UNDER SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. OF INDIA

www.mohfw.nic.in

Babus also get right to know grades they got before 2008-09

Babus also get right to know grades they got before 2008-09

Nudged by criticism that the department of personnel and training was ruining careers of officers who did not get along with their bosses, the government has finally decided to act.

Last week, the government finally decided to communicate grades in the Annual Confidential Reports of officers if their performance had been rated anything less than the benchmark for promotions — “very good” — prior to 2008-09.

“…It has been decided that if an employee is to be considered for promotion in a future DPC (departmental promotion committee) and his ACRs prior to 2008-09… contain final grading which are below the benchmark for his next promotion… the employee concerned will be given a copy of the relevant ACR for his representation, if any, within 15 days of such communication,” the department said in a memorandum on April 13.

“It may be noted that only below-benchmark ACR for the period relevant to promotion need be sent. There is no need to send below-benchmark ACRs of other years,” it added. It isn’t that the government still makes a secret of the grading for babus.

The government had to reluctantly adopt a higher transparency norm in 2008-09 on the directions of the Supreme Court that all entries in the ACR of a public servant must be communicated to him within a reasonable period.

“This… is the correct legal position even though there may be no rule/G.O. (Government Order) requiring communication of the entry, or even if there is a rule/G.O. prohibiting it, because principle of non-arbitrariness in State action as envisaged by Article 14 of the Constitution,” the Supreme Court had held in May 2008. But a year later when the powerful DoPT — that reports to the PM — issued the necessary orders to incorporate this SC directive, it did not make a mention of how grading given by officers prior to the new rule were to be treated.
Silence on this account resulted in the government treating grading in previous years with utmost secrecy. This, despite the fact the older grading would be taken into consideration.

So, the government continued to submit ACRs with a “good” grading to the Union Public Service Commission for the departmental promotion committee meetings.

Since “good” isn’t really good in the present system of performance evaluation, these officers lost the chance to be promoted without ever being asked to tell their side of the story.

“No less than 50 officers of the rank of Joint Secretaries were forced to file cases in the Central Administrative Tribunal and had to face the humiliation of working under junior officers,” N.K. Jain, Commissioner, Income Tax at Jodhpur, recently wrote in G-Files, a magazine that focuses on government and governance issues.

Source: Hindustan Times

Office Memorandum - 13 April, 2010

CAT rejects plea of R & AW officer seeking promotion

CAT rejects plea of R&AW officer seeking promotion

The Central Administrative Tribunal has turned down a plea for promotion of a Research and Analysis Wing (R&AW) officer, saying he was not subjected to any discrimination with regard to service gradings.

R&AW Additional Secretary C K Sinha approached the Tribunal seeking directions to the Centre to promote him to Special Secretary, contending that authorities treated him unfairly in awarding downgradings in ACRs.

The Tribunal said the departmental promotions committee (DPC) after considering his candidature found him unfit for the post as his annual confidential reports (ACRs) were below the bench mark.

"We have carefully perused the ACRs of Sinha. In so far as the ACR for the period 1998-99 is concerned, the accepting authority has recorded the reasons for downgrading....

Benchmark Grading - Clarification issued by DOPT

NO. 21011/1/2010-Estt.A
Government of lndia
Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievances 8 Pensions
Department of Personnel 8 Training
*****

  

North Block, New Delhi
Dated the 13th April, 2010

  

OFFICE MEMORANDUM

  

Subject: Below Benchmark gradings in ACRs prior to the reporting period 2008-09 and objective consideration of representation by the competent authority against remarks in the APAR or for upgradatin of the final grading.

  

The undersigned is directed to say that prior to the reporting period 2008-09, only the adverse remarks in the ACRs had to be communicated to the concerned officer for representation, if any to be considered by the competent authority. The question of treating the grading in the ACR which is below the benchmark for next promotion has been considered in this Deparment and it has been decided that if an employee is to be considered for promotion in a future DPC and his ACRs prior to the period 2008-09 which would be reckonable for assessment of his fitness in such future DPCs contain final grading which are below the benchmark for his next promotion, before such ACRs are placed before the DPC,the concemed employee will be given a copy of the relevant ACR for his representation, if any, within 15 days of such communication. It may be noted that only below benchmark ACR for the period relevant to promotion need be sent. There is no need to send below benchmark ACRs of other years.

  

2. As per existing instructions, representations against the remarks or for upgradation of !he final grading given in the APAR (previously known as ACR) should be examined by the competent authority in consultation, if necessary, with the Reporting and the Reviewing Officer, if any. While considering the representation, the competent authority decides the matter objectively in a quasi-judicial manner on the basis of material placed before it. This would imply that the competent authority shall take into account the contentions of the officer who has represented against the particular remarks/grading in the APAR and the views of the Reporting and Reviewing officer if they are still in service on the points raised in the representation vis-a-vis the remarks/gradings given bv them in the APAR. The UPSC has informed this Departrnent that the Commission has observed that while deciding such representations, the competent authorities sometimes do not take into account the views of Reporting/Reviewing Officers if thev are still in service. The Commission has further observed that in majority of such cases, the competent authority does not give specific reasons for upgrading the below benchmark ACR/APAR gradings at par with the benchmark for next promotion.

  

3.All Ministries/Departments are therefore requested to inform the competent authorities while forwarding such cases to them to decide on the representations against the remarks or for upgradation of the grading in the APAR that the decision on the representation may be taken objectively after taking into account the views of the concerned Reporting/Reviewing Officers if they are still in service' and in case of upgradation of the final grading given in the APAR, specific reasons therefor may also be given in the order of the competent authority.

  

(CA. Subramanian)
Director