IN RE : T.N. GODAVARMAN THIRUMULPAD v. UNION OF INDIA
Discusses principles of fair performance appraisal, hierarchy, and accountability applicable across various services and administrative contexts.
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: 2025 INSC 748
Decision Date: 21-05-2025
List of Laws
The All-India Services Act, 1951; All-India Services (Confidential Rolls) Rules, 1970; All-India Services (Performance Appraisal Report) Rules, 2007; Constitution of India, 1949; General Principles of Law
- The All-India Services Act, 1951: The judgment discusses Section 3(1) of the Act, which empowers the Central Government to make rules for the regulation of recruitment and conditions of service of persons appointed to an all-India Service. The judgment refers to this section when discussing the All-India Services (Confidential Rolls) Rules, 1970 and the All-India Services (Performance Appraisal Report) Rules, 2007, both of which were made in exercise of the powers conferred by Section 3(1) of the AIS Act. The court analyzes the definitions of "reporting authority", "reviewing authority", and "accepting authority" under these rules. The judgment also mentions that for writing confidential reports, the Central Government has framed All India Services (Confidential Rolls) Rules, 1970 under Section 3 of the All India Services Act, 1951.
- All-India Services (Confidential Rolls) Rules, 1970: The judgment extensively discusses Rule 2 of the 1970 Rules, which provides various definitions, including those of "accepting authority" [Rule 2(a)], "reporting authority" [Rule 2(e)], and "reviewing authority" [Rule 2(f)]. The court analyzes these definitions and their amendments in 1987. The court refers to these rules in the context of determining the appropriate authorities for writing Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs) for officers of the Indian Forest Service (IFS). The judgment also refers to Rule 2(e) in the context of the Santosh Bharti case, noting that the State interpreted it to mean that a confidential report could be written by a superior officer or another officer specified in that behalf. The court also refers to Rule 2(e), 2(f) and 2(a) of the All India Services (Confidential Rolls) Rules, 1970 as amended on 8.12.1987 dealing with the "reporting authority", "reviewing authority" and "accepting authority", respectively. The court also refers to Rule 6-B of the Rules providing that where the “accepting authority" writes or reviews the C.Rs. of any member of the Service, it shall not be further necessary to review or accept any such report.
- All-India Services (Performance Appraisal Report) Rules, 2007: The judgment refers to the definitions of "accepting authority", "reporting authority", and "reviewing authority" as provided in the 2007 Rules. The court considers these definitions in the context of determining the appropriate authorities for writing Performance Appraisal Reports (PARs) for officers of the Indian Forest Service (IFS).
- Constitution of India, 1949: The judgment refers to Article 166(2) and 166(3) of the Constitution of India, stating that the Governor of Madhya Pradesh framed the Madhya Pradesh Government Business (Allocation) Rules in accordance with these provisions.
- General Principles of Law: The judgment discusses the principles of governance, accountability, and equity in public administration, emphasizing the need for accountability through real supervision in the performance appraisal process. It also discusses the importance of seniority and pay scales in assigning reporting authorities. The judgment also emphasizes objectivity, impartiality, and fair assessment in officers reporting on performance.
🔒 For Members Only