“ Considering the entire facts and circumstances, it appears that the petitioner admittedly did not challenge the promotion of the respondent No.10 at the relevant point of time and after almost four years now challenges the said promotion. According to this Court, it would not be proper to interfere with the aforesaid promotion of respondent No. 10 at this belated stage as that would unsettled the settled position. However, as the petitioner has made a representation on 11.10.2012 to the Director cum Secretary, Tribal Welfare, Government of Tripura and admittedly, the adverse remarks in the ACRs which was considered by the DPC and on the basis of which, the petitioner was found unfit for promotion, was not communicated to her, this Court is of considered opinion that by this time it is settled that the adverse remarks entered into the ACRs have to be communicated to the employee concerned and without communicating the same, the employer cannot act on the basis of the said ACRs which would adversely affect the interest of the employee and as admittedly the same was not communicated to the petitioner, it would be proper to ask the respondent No. 2 and 3 to consider the representation of the petitioner dated 11.10.12 ( Annexure15 to the writ petition) and dispose of the same. It is ordered accordingly. At the time of disposing of the representation of the petitioner, the authority should reconsider the ACRs of the petitioner and if ultimately gradation of the ACRs is altered, then the same should be placed before the DPC for reconsideration of her case afresh. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from today.
