2001 PLP (C (PLC(CS))

MUHAMMAD RAZA KHAN (MEMBER).

The appellant was posted as Assistant Director, Federal Investigation Agency, since 1992 in various capacities. He is aggrieved by a communication, dated 2-5-1997 intimating the adverse remakrs recorded in his A.C.R. for the period 1-1-1996 to 7-8-1996. It may be mentioned that in the said A.C.R. he has been rated as "Below Average" in almost all the columns. After seeking departmental remedy he has filed the present appeal on 1-10-1997. The respondents have filed objections. We have listened to the arguments.

2. There, are certain facts which are relevant for the purposes of the disposal of the present appeal and have not been denied. These are that the appellant remained under training at the Academy from 29-9-1992 to 19-3-1994 and thereafter he had been posted in the Crime Circle, Rawalpindi, FIA HQs, (Stores), FIA HQs (Immigration and Ant Smuggling), State Bank Circle FIA Academy and again at the Crime Circle, Rawalpindi, till 25-1-1997. Out of this posting period, he had remained in the FIA Academy from 28-8-1995 to 6-8-1996. This period of stay has been reflected in the two A.C.Rs. i.e. one from 28-8-1995 to 31-12-1995 and the other from 1-1-1996 to 7-8-1996. The first part recorded by the same initiating officer is admittedly not adverse whereas the second part of the said report by the same officer was entirely adverse in almost all the columns. During this service period of over five years and stay at more than seven stations, the appellant has not been awarded any adverse entry in any of the annual or special report rather admittedly he has been given appreciations by the respective officers.

3. Analaysed in this situation, the report for the part of 1996 becomes a solitary, unconnected and unjustifiable document. A person who is considered to be "good" in all aspects of his personality and behaviour prior to and after a particular period cannot be considered to have suddenly fallen down to the lowest ebb for a brief interregnum only in all aspects of service discipline. The Department concedes that out of this period of seven months and six days the appellant was on leave for three months and was also on special duty at an Embassy for one week and so the retraining period is less than four months which, though justifies the rights of the initiating officer to record the A.C.R. yet, without strong supporting reasons, does not justify the spoiling of the entire career. The only allegation which could be attributed to or argued against the appellant was regarding the irresponsibility and unpunctuality.

4. A perusal of the record shows that the appellant was found coming late to the office on two occasions and the explanation was called. The scrutiny of the said two occasions further discloses that those two occasions also fell on the same date i.e. on 19-9-1995 which also displays the attitude of the department. A person cannot be late twice on a single day. However, two documents were prepared to provide at least a justification against the appellant. Even if the late coming of a single day in the entire length of service be presumed to be indiscipline, that does nor justify to damage the entire service career of the civil servant including his personal qualities, attitude and proficiency in job and more specifically the knowledge about Islam, the attitude towards Islamic ideology, appearance and bearing, intelligence, foresight, relations with others, powers of expression etc. etc.

5. The representatives of the respondents had no alternative but to refer to certain previous instances to justify the adverse observations. This has reminded us of the old adage between the wolf and the lamb. The performance of an officer during a year is reflected in the A.C.R. for the said year and it cannot be taken forward by storing in memory to be recorded in some future A.C.Rs. The performance in a particular year becomes a close chapter after the expiry of the said year. Even otherwise there was no proof about any previous matter of known display of inefficiency or lack of knowledge particularly about Islam.

6. The A.C.R. plays an extremely vital role in the service record of a civil servant and, therefore, all those who are entrusted with the recording of such A.C.Rs. should do so objectively with extreme care so that no innocent may suffer a loss in service career for uncommitted offences and unproved allegations. Those responsible to record the A.C.Rs. may also develop a sense of accountability herein as well as hereafter. They tray also notice the element of retribution in nature that the person has to pay back in the same coin for the irresponsible behaviour. Playing with the service career and life of a person irresponsibly cannot be considered to be a trifle matter. These observations had become necessary to be recorded particularly in view of the fact that the same initiating officer had given "good" report to the appellant for the period just preceding the period for which he has recorded an entirely adverse observation and that too without any proof or reference.

7. Thus, we have no alternative but to accept this appeal, set aside the impugned communication and to expunge the entire adverse entries. We further direct that all these entries may be upgraded in the manner recorded at least in the A.C.R. for the period between 28-8-1995 to 31-12-1995. Cost to follow the events. Although the judgment was announced in the open Court yet the copies of the judgment may be sent to the concerned parties as per the procedure laid down in the Rules. H.B.T./251/ST/F Appeal accepted.