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

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....

CAT clears air on promotion benefits

If an employee, fulfiling the eligibility criteria for promotion to a particular post, works for a reasonable period on that post against a vacancy,, the government cannot deny him/her the actual promotion and accompanying financial benefits, the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) has held.

A Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) bench headed by Chairman Justice V.K. Bali held that in such a situation, it would be arbitrary to deny salary and other benefits of the promoted post to the employee.

The bench ordered the Delhi Government to re-fix the salary and retirement benefits of six retired school teachers, who had been given notional promotion to the post of principal, albeit without any accruing financial benefits.

Rejecting the Delhi Government’s arguments that all promotions had to be prospective and retired employees had no right to actual promotion, the CAT allowed the petition filed by Gaurishankar Sharma, Budh Prakash Tyagi, Raj Kumar Uppal, Prabhu Dayal, Jagdish Prasad Sharma and Chintamani Mathur.

It directed the Delhi Government to fix the correct salary of the petitioners, from the dates each of them had been promoted notionally to principal and to fix par arrears of salary for the period they were in service.

The CAT also ordered payment of revised retirement benefits, with six per cent interest on arrears within four months. The petitioners had served as heads of schools over several years.

But the Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC), held after their retirement, recommended only notional promotion for them and accordingly, the government did not give them any financial benefit of promotion.

Aggrieved by the decision, they moved the CAT, seeking benefit of the pay scale of principal, from the date they were assumed charge of the post, plus the arrears of pay and allowances after proper pay fixation, with retrospective effect. They also demanded revision of their retirement benefits.

The government contended the DPC could not be convened due to procedural reasons while they were in service and making them principals was only a stopgap arrangement. It said petitioners were not eligible for revision of retirement benefits and back wages because their promotion was only notional.

But citing the Supreme Court’s rulings on the issue, the CAT rejected these arguments.

“By virtue of the fact that the Applicants have actually worked on the post of principal, they would …be eligible for payment of back wages also, besides salary for the post of principal, from the date they have been notionally promoted to that post,” it said.
Source: Hindustan Times

The regular promotions of the employees are decided on the basis of recommendations made by the D P C

Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC)
The regular promotions of the government employees are generally decided on the basis of recommendations made by the Departmental Promotion Committees. The Departmental Promotion Committees are constituted to judge the suitability of officers for -
(a) promotions to “Selection” as well as "Non-selection" posts
(b) assessment of the work and conduct of probationers for the purpose of determining their suitability for retention in service or their discharge from it or extending their probation and subsequent confirmation if found suitable for retention in service.

The UPSC should be associated with DPCs in respect of all Central Civil Services/posts belonging to Group 'A' where promotion is based on the principles of “Selection cum Seniority” unless it has been decided by the Government not to associate the UPSC with a Group 'A' DPC. The UPSC need not be associated in respect of the posts belonging to Group 'A', if the promotion is based not on the principles of "Selection" but on “seniority-cum-fitness” only.

Whenever the UPSC is associated with a DPC, the Chairman or a Member of the Commission will preside over the meeting of the DPC.
Where the Recruitment/Service Rules lay down promotion as one of the methods of recruitment, some period of service in the feeder grade is generally prescribed as one of the conditions of eligibility for the purpose of promotion.
The eligibility dates for determining the eligibility of officers for promotion would be the first day of the crucial year, i.e. January, 1 irrespective of whether ACRs are written financial year-wise or calendar year-wise.

Guidelines for DPCs
The following guidelines are laid down to regulate the assessment of suitability of candidates by DPCs:
While merit has to be recognised and rewarded, advancement in an officer's career should not be regarded as a matter of course, but should be earned by dint of hard work, good conduct and result-oriented performance as reflected in the annual confidential reports and based on strict and rigorous selection process.
Confidential Reports are the basic inputs on the basis of which assessment is to be made by each DPC. The evaluation of CRs should be fair, just and non-discriminatory. Hence, the DPC should assess the suitability of the employees for promotion on the basis of their Service Records and with particular reference to the CRs for five preceding years irrespective of the qualifying service prescribed in the Service/Recruitment Rules. (If more than one CR has been written for a particular year, all the CRs for the relevant years shall be considered together as the CR for one year).
Where one or more CRs have not been written for any reason during the relevant period, the DPC should consider the CRs of the years preceding the period in question and if in any case even these are not available, the DPC should take the CRs of the lower grade into account to complete the number of CRs required to be considered as per above para. If this is also not possible, all the available CRs should be taken into account.

Principles to be observed for preparation of panel:
In case of ‘selection’ (merit) promotion, the hitherto existing distinction in the nomenclature (‘selected by merit’ and ‘selection-cum-seniority) is dispensed with and the mode of promotion in all such cases is rechristened as ‘selection’ only. The element of selectivity (higher or lower) shall be determined with reference to the relevant benchmark (“Very Good” or “Good”) prescribed for promotion.

The DPC shall determine the merit of those being assessed for promotion with reference to the prescribed benchmark and accordingly grade the officers as ‘fit’ or ‘unfit’ only. Only those who are graded ‘fit’ (i.e. who meet the prescribed benchmark) by the DPC shall be included and arranged in the select panel in order of their inter-se seniority in the feeder grade.

Those officers who are graded ‘unfit’ (in terms of the prescribed benchmark) by the DPC shall not be included in the select panel. Thus, there shall be no supersession in promotion among those who are graded ‘fit’ (in terms of the prescribed benchmark) by the DPC.

Procedure to be followed by DPC in respect of government servants under cloud:
At the time of consideration of the cases of government servants for promotion, details of government servants in the consideration zone for promotion falling under the following categories should be specifically brought to the notice of the Departmental Promotion Committee:
i. Government servants under suspension;
ii. Government servants in respect of whom a charge-sheet has been issued and the disciplinary proceedings are pending; and
iii. Government servants in respect of whom prosecution for a criminal charge is pending.
The DPC shall assess the suitability of the government servants coming within the purview of the circumstances mentioned above along with other eligible candidates without taking into consideration the disciplinary case/criminal prosecution pending. The assessment of the DPC, including “Unfit for Promotion”, will be kept in a sealed cover.
The same procedure outlined in the above para will be followed by the subsequent Departmental Promotion Committees convened till the disciplinary case/criminal prosecution against the government servant concerned is concluded.
It has been decided that the “Sealed Cover Procedure” prescribed in the Department of Personnel and Training, OM No. 22011/4/91-Estt.(A) dated
14.9.1992 referred to above may be followed at the time of consideration for ad hoc promotion also in the case of government servants -
(i) who are under suspension;
(ii) in respect of whom a charge-sheet has been issued and the disciplinary proceedings are pending; and
(iii) in respect of whom prosecution for a criminal charge is pending.

Processing of recommendations of DPC :

The recommendations of the DPC are advisory in nature and should be duly approved by the appointing authority. A clearance from the Vigilance Section of the Office/Department should also be obtained before making actual promotion or confirmation of officer approved by DPC to ensure that no disciplinary proceedings are pending against the officer concerned. Promotion should be made strictly in the order in which the names of the officers appear in the panel.

Refusal of promotion:

When a government employee does not want to accept an offer of promotion, he may make a written request to that effect and the same will be considered by the appointing authority. If the reasons adduced for refusal of promotion are acceptable to the appointing authority, the next person in the select list may be promoted.

However, since it may not be administratively possible or desirable to offer appointment to the persons who initially refused promotion, on every occasion on which a vacancy arises, during the period of validity of the panel, no fresh offer of appointment on promotion shall be made in such cases for a period of one year from the date of refusal of first promotion or till a next vacancy arises, whichever is later.

On the eventual promotion to the higher grade, such government servant will lose seniority vis-a-vis his juniors promoted to the higher grade earlier irrespective of the fact whether the posts in question are filled by selection or otherwise. The above mentioned policy will not apply where ad hoc promotions against short-term vacancies are refused.

In cases where the reasons adduced by the officer for his refusal for promotion are not acceptable, the appointing authority should enforce the promotion of the officer and in case the officer still refuses to be promoted, then even disciplinary action can be taken against him for refusing to obey the orders of the appointing authority.

Validity of a panel:

The panel for promotion drawn up by DPC for 'selection' posts would normally be valid for one year. It should cease to be in force on the expiry of a period of one year or when a fresh panel is prepared, whichever is earlier.

The date of commencement of the validity of panel will be the date on which the DPC meets. In case the DPC meets on more than one day, the last date of the meeting would be the date of commencement of the validity of the panel. In case the panel requires, partially or wholly, the approval of the Commission, the date of validity of panel would be the date (of Commission's letter) communicating their approval to the panel.

It is important to ensure that the Commission's approval to the panel is obtained, where necessary, with the least possible delay.

SCREENING COMMITTEE - Granting the benefits under the ACP Scheme

SCREENING COMMITTEE

A departmental Screening Committee shall be constituted for the purpose of processing the cases for grant of benefits under the ACP Scheme.

The composition of the Screening Committee shall be the same as that of the DPC prescribed under the relevant Recruitment/Service Rules for regular promotion to the higher grade to which financial upgradation is to be granted.

However, in cases where DPC as per the prescribed rules is headed by the Chairman/Member of the UPSC, the Screening Committee under the ACP Scheme shall, instead, be headed by the Secretary or an officer of equivalent rank of the concerned Ministry/Department.

In respect of isolated posts, the composition of the Screening Committee (with modification as noted above, if required) shall be the same as that of the DPC for promotion to analogous grade in that Ministry/Department.

In order to prevent operation of the ACP Scheme from resulting into undue strain on the administrative machinery, the Screening Committee shall follow a time-schedule and meet twice in a financial year – preferably in the first week of January and July for advance processing of the cases.

Accordingly, cases maturing during the first-half (April-September) of a particular financial year for grant of benefits under the ACP Scheme shall be taken up for consideration by the Screening Committee meeting in the first week of January of the previous financial year.

Similarly, the Screening Committee meeting in the first week of July of any financial year shall process the cases that would be maturing during the second-half (October-March) of the same financial year.

For example, the Screening Committee meeting in the first week of January, 1999 would process the cases that would attain maturity during the period April 1, 1999 to September 30, 1999 and the Screening Committee meeting in the first week of July, 1999 would process the cases that would mature during the period October 1, 1999 to March 31, 2000.

To make the Scheme operational, the Cadre Controlling Authorities shall constitute the first Screening Committee of the current financial year within a month from the date of issue of these instructions to consider the cases that have already matured or would be maturing upto March 31, 2000 for grant of benefits under the ACP Scheme. The next Screening Committee shall be constituted as per the time-schedule suggested above.

Ministries/Departments are advised to explore the possibility of effecting savings so as to minimise the additional financial commitment that introduction of the ACP Scheme may entail.

The ACP Scheme shall become operational from the date of issue of this Office Memorandum. In so far as persons serving in the Indian Audit and Accounts Departments are concerned, these orders issue after consultation with the Comptroller and Auditor General of India.

The Fifth Central Pay Commission in paragraph 52.15 of its Report has also separately recommended a "Dynamic Assured Career Progression Mechanism" for different streams of doctors. It has been decided that the said recommendation may be considered separately by the administrative Ministry concerned in consultation with the Department of Personnel and Training and the Department of Expenditure. Any interpretation/clarification of doubt as to the scope and meaning of the provisions of the ACP Scheme shall be given by the Department of Personnel and Training (Establishment-D). All Ministries/Departments may give wide circulation to these instructions for guidance of all concerned and also take immediate steps to implement the Scheme keeping in view the ground situation obtaining in services/cadres/ posts within their administrative jurisdiction.