Judges can be denied promotion citing adverse ACRs: SC

New Delhi, January 15
The Supreme Court has ruled that judges can be denied promotion or extension in service on the basis of adverse remarks in the annual confidential reports (ACRs).

The remarks in ACRs “do enable” the authority to assess the comparative merit of judges while deciding promotions applying the merit-cum-seniority criteria, a Bench comprising Justices RM Lodha and HL Gokhale clarified in a verdict last week.

The Bench made the observation while dismissing the appeal of NC Das, who was a member of the Tripura Judicial Service (Grade II) holding the post of Civil Judge (Senior Division), North Tripura.

Das, who retired on December 31, 2006 at the age of 58, had pleaded for quashing a Gauhati High Court memo issued on June 7, 2005 denying him promotion under the Assured Career Progress.

Das had contended that he was wrongly denied the promotion in July 2003 although his juniors were accorded promotion. His case for promotion ought to have been considered under recruitment and service rules relating to Grade I and II of the Tripura Judicial Service Rules 1974, he argued.

Besides being superseded, he was also denied service extension till the age of 60 despite the fact that the superannuation age stood enhanced to 60 years.

Rejecting this plea, the SC pointed out that giving extension in service was the discretion of the Guahati HC. Citing a communication between the HC Registrar and the Tripura Law Department, the SC said the HC had in fact considered the issue of extension and found that he “did not deserve” to be recommended for service till the age of 60.

The apex court noted that ACR of Das for the year 2000 clearly mentioned that “he was not yet fit for promotion. Similar remarks have been recorded in 2001 and 2002 ACRs. Thus, in last three years immediately preceding the date of consideration of the petitioner’s case for promotion, his ACRs show that he was not found fit for promotion.”

Based on the remarks in the ACRs for 2000, 2001 and 2002, if he had been “denied promotion in July 2003, such action can hardly be faulted,” the Bench reasoned.

Confusion over nationality

HC raps Centre, state for not releasing foreigner
afer jail sentence is over
Chandigarh, January 14
Sayad Rasool is behind bars even after the completion of his jail sentence. The foreign national continues to be in Amritsar Jail because neither the Centre nor the State of Punjab really knows whether he is from Pakistan or Afghanistan.
The failure of the powers to establish his nationality has now invited the Punjab and Haryana High Court's ire. The Punjab Home Secretary is virtually in the dock over the issue.
Rapping both the Centre and the State of Punjab on its knuckles, Justice Ranjit Singh asserted: "I am unable to understand how this simple issue is pending resolution by the State. How can the identity of a person be unknown to the jail or the state authorities once he has faced trial and is convicted…."
"In my view, whether the detainee belongs to Pakistan or Afghanistan would hardly make a difference. Once he has undergone the sentence imposed on him, action has to be taken to deport him."
"For that, it may have to be seen whether he has to be deported to Pakistan or Afghanistan. But, this aspect was required to be ascertained by all the authorities concerned, once he was about to complete the sentence imposed on him…."
"Requisite efforts have neither been made by the Union of India, nor the State of Punjab, to see to an end the agony of this person, which is revealing a serious violation of human rights," the court said.
"A simple approach by either the Union of India, or the State of Punjab to contact the embassies of Afghanistan and Pakistan would have led to some solution. It appears that both the governments are palming of their respective responsibilities to each other and have not taken appropriate action in the matter".
Before parting with the order, Justice Ranjit Singh asserted: "Let the Home Secretary of the State of Punjab and a representative of the Government of India remain present before this Court on the next date of hearing".
The petition seeking Rasool's release has been filed by the World Human Rights Council through its chairman Ranjan Lakhanpal. Rasool was arrested at Gherinda under Amritsar police district and a FIR under the provisions of the Foreigners' Act and the Indian Passport Act was registered against him on April 26, 2009.

100 acres for Punjabi varsity in Pakistan

Arif Choudhary, president of the Pak-India Friendship Society, informed that his NRI friend from New York Abdul Rehman had donated 100 acres of land in Nankana Sahib in Pakistan to establish Punjabi University there. He said they had already started working out the details. "It will be a private university that will provide a common platform to all Punjabis for learning Punjabi language and culture. The reason for choosing this particular place is because this land belonged to Guru Nanak Dev Ji and what could be better than this place to establish Punjabi University," he added.

NRI wants to record statement against Tytler

Amritsar, January 14
Resham Singh, an NRI based in the US, has approached a Delhi court requesting that his testimony about senior Congress leader Jagdish Tytler's role in 1984 anti-Sikh riots should be recorded before the court gives its final verdict on the closure report filed by the CBI.
As per a release issued here by Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, legal advisor to Sikhs for Justice (SFJ), Resham Singh, in his affidavit to Delhi court, described the details of efforts made by him from 2008 till December 2011 to have the CBI record his testimony regarding Tytler's involvement in attack on Gurdwara Pul Bangash.
Resham Singh, who used to drive taxi in Delhi, claims that on November 1, 1984 he saw Tytler leading a mob outside the Gurdwara Pul Bangash in which three Sikhs were burnt alive.