Madhya Pradesh High Court Imposes Rs 50,000 Cost On State For Taking Almost 10 years To Search Doctor’s ACRs For Deciding Higher Pay-Scale

Observing that serious efforts should have been made to search the missing Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs), the Madhya Pradesh High Court at Indore directed the State Government to consider the case of a retired doctor for grant of higher pay scale which was rejected earlier due to non-availability of ACRs.

Justice Vivek Rusia further imposed a cost of Rs. 50,000/- on the State Government for the delay. The court said the authorities took almost 10 years to search the ACRs of the petitioner and kept this matter pending until the court directed for personal appearance of CMHO, Ratlam.

“The ACRs which have been found in this month, could have been found in the year 2017 or prior to it, but the respondents/Government compelled the petitioner to approach this Court twice. This is how the Government authorities are responsible for filing of number of cases in the High Court. When CMHO was directed to appear personally, then only ACRs have been made available. This approach of the Government should be deprecated. It is not only harassment to the retired employees, senior citizens but it is burdening the High with these types of cases.”

The petitioner’s representation for grant of higher pay-scale w.e.f. January 1, 1994 was rejected by the concerned department on March 25, 2017. The petitioner then approached the High Court by way of a petition which was disposed of with a direction to the respondents to consider the representation of the petitioner.

However, the representation of the petitioner was rejected by the concerned department on the ground that ACRs were not available. Thus, the petitioner again approached the High Court. The court issued notice on February 12, 2021 to the respondents but no reply was filed. The Court on June 15 this year directed the CMHO, Ratlam to remain personally present before the Court to explain as to why the reply has not been filed till date.

On July 14, the CMHO, Ratlam remained present before the court and submitted that now the ACRs of the petitioner are available with the respondents.

"Before deciding the representation serious efforts should have been made to search the missing ACRs. of the petitioner. The ACRs. were available in the Department but without search the representation has been dismissed mechanically, therefore, the petitioner had no option but to file the present petition at the age of 75 years," said the court, while allowing the petition.

Case Title: Dr. Naresh Sinha v. The State of Madhya Pradesh and Anr

Click Here to Read/Download Judgment