IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.7033 OF 2001

Pawan N. Chandra      ...Appellant(s)

Versus

Rajasthan High Court and Anr.      ...Respondent(s)

O  R  D  E  R

The appellant joined Rajasthan Judicial Service in the year 1982.  While  

he  was  working  as  Civil  Judge  (Senior  Division)  cum  Additional  Chief  Judicial  Magistrate, Nimbahera, the following adverse remarks were recorded in his Annual  

Confidential Report for the year 1996:

“Integrity doubtful.  He is not fair and impartial in dealing with  the public and the Bar.  He is calculating and planning to earn  more money.  His honest is not absolute.  His image in public is  not  bright.   Capacity  to  handle  files  systematically  –  not  adequate.  He took no pains to disposal old cases.  Capacity to  control  the proceedings  in  court  with firmness  and follow the  procedure  prescribed  by  law-inadequate.   Below  Average,  Integrity certificate with held for the year 1996”.

The  representation  made  by  the  appellant  for  expunging  the  adverse  

remarks was rejected by the High Court on administrative side and the writ petition  filed by him was dismissed by the impugned order.

....2/-

- 2 -

We have heard learned counsel for the parties. In  compliance  of  the  direction  given  by  the  Court,  learned  counsel  

appearing  for  the  High  Court  has  produced  the  service  record  of  the  appellant  including his Annual Confidential Reports.  A perusal thereof shows that during the  

entire service tenure of the appellant from 1982 till date, no adverse remark has been  recorded about his integrity except for the year 1996.  From 1982 to 1995 and 1997 till  

date, the appellant has, by and large, been rated as a good officer.  During these years  his immediate superiors have written positive about his performance and integrity.  

Only in some of the years he has been rated as an average officer. For the year 1993,  his  performance  was  described  as  below  average  but  on  representation  the  said  

remark was expunged.  In this backdrop, the sweeping adverse remarks made in the  Annual Confidential Report of the appellant for 1996 casting doubt on his integrity,  

impartiality and capacity to work cannot be treated as justified more so because the  same  were  primarily  based  on  the  complaints  made  by  two  accused  whose  bail  

application etc. had been rejected by the appellant and the High Court committed an  error  by refusing  to expunge the  adverse remarks despite  detailed representation  

made by the appellant which was duly supported by tangible evidence.  In the totality  of the circumstances,  we are of the view that the High Court was not justified in  

recording the adverse remarks in the Annual Confidential Report of the appellant for  the year 1996.

....3/-

- 3 -

In the impugned order, the High Court has referred to the fact that in  1984, two judgments of the appellant were found below standard and in 1992 he was  

not found sitting in the court during the working hours on 3.4.1992 and concluded  that his record cannot be treated as clean.  The High Court has also taken adverse  

view of the appellant’s assertion that the adverse entry of below average made in his  Annual Confidential Report for the year 1993 was expunged by observing that the  

expunging of remarks cannot be made basis for claiming that his service record was  clean.  In our view, the approach of the High Court was clearly erroneous.  Once the  

adverse remarks had been expunged, the same could not be relied upon for making  an observation that the appellant’s record was not clean.   

Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.  The adverse remarks reproduced in  the  earlier  part  of  this  order  are  directed  to  be  expunged  from  the  Annual  

Confidential Report of the appellant for the year 1996. Needless  to  say  that  the  appellant  shall  be  entitled  to  all  consequential  

benefits.

......................J.       [B.N. AGRAWAL]

......................J.       [G.S. SINGHVI]

New Delhi, April 21, 2009.