Court Rules Co‑Employee Cannot Challenge ACR Grading That Led to Promotion Supersession

The bench examined a petition filed by an employee who sought to overturn his colleague's Annual Confidential Report (ACR) rating, arguing that the rating had caused his colleague to be superseded in a promotion. The court observed that the ACR is a performance appraisal tool governed by service rules, and a grievance about the rating must be pursued through the established internal mechanisms, not by directly challenging the outcome in a promotion case.

The judgment clarified that the mere fact that an ACR led to a supersession does not give a co‑employee a legal right to contest the grading. The court emphasized that procedural safeguards exist within the department for addressing alleged biases or errors in performance evaluations.

By rejecting the petition, the court reinforced the principle that employment disputes related to performance assessments should be resolved within the administrative framework, preserving the integrity of the promotion process.

Legal experts noted that the decision underscores the limited scope of judicial intervention in internal service matters, urging employees to exhaust departmental remedies before approaching the courts.

The ruling is expected to guide future cases involving ACR disputes and promotion supersession across government and public sector organizations.