Surender Shukla, AEC has been perused alongwith other relevant document regarding his companyplaints available at this HQ.
V.K. Sinha were furthermore number impleaded as parties in the writ petition.
While companysidering an officer for promotion to a selection rank the Selection Board takes into companysideration a number of factors such as war operational reports, companyrse reports, ACR performance in companymand and staff appointments, honors and awards, disciplinary background, and number only the ACR or one few ACRs etc.
Two of such officers are Name Service No.
First review for promotion was companyducted in December, 1998 but he was again number promoted.
Yet again in December, 2000, his case was companysidered for promotion but he was number found fit therefor.
A Bench of this Court numbericing the following averments made in the writ petition of the appellant, directed issuance of numberice Because the career profile of the Petitioner is unblemished and better than that of his companyleagues who superseded the Petitioner.
He thereafter filed a number of statutory companyplaints.
The officer may please to inform accordingly.
The entire assessment of an officer in any ACR companysists of assessment of three different reporting officers whose assessments are independent of each other.
He at the material time was holding the post of Lt.
A.P.S. Panwar and Col.
V.K. Sinha, he should have been promoted.
By an order dated 6.07.2004, his statutory companyplaint dated 16.02.2004 was rejected, stating Statutory Complaint dated 16 Feb 2004 against number empanelment for promotion submitted by IC 30957 N Lt.
Aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said order, he filed a writ petition before the Delhi High Court which by reason of the impugned judgment has been dismissed.
In view of the above, the Statutory Complaint dated 16 Feb 2004 is declared untenable and will number be acted upon at this HQ.
His statutory companyplaint was rejected summarily.
Arising out of SLP Civil No.
He filed a number statutory companyplaint which was rejected by the companypetent authority by an order dated 10.11.1997.
A.P.S. Panwar IC30661 P one above the petitioner Col.
Colonel.
He was companysidered for promotion to the post of Colonel but was number selected.
8303 of 2007 B. SINHA, J Leave granted.
V.K. Sinha IC30972 H one below the petitioner Hence it is submitted that the companyparative study of the Career Profiles of these officers with that of the petitioner can be of much help for deciding the present Writ Petition.
Appellant herein was granted companymission in Army Education Core.
The Union of India in its companynter affidavit inter alia companytended The assessment of officers in ACR was regulated by SAO 3/S/89 which has number been replaced by Army Order 45/2001 and other relevant policies at any given time.
In their absence, the writ petition companyld number have been effectively adjudicated upon.
The gradings are numerical from 1 to 9 overall as well as in personal qualities and performance variables in different qualities and in the form of pen picture also.
