WP(C) 6515/2010 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR JUSTICE B. K. SHARMA Heard Mr. P. Pathak, learned senior counsel assisted by Ms. P. Barman an d Ms. S. Changkakati, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as Ms. R. Chakr aborty, learned Addl. Sr. Govt. Advocate. 2. The petitioner, who is presently working as Superintendent of Police (Co mmunication) in the Assam Police Radio Organisation (APRO), Govt. of Assam, is aggrieved by the adve rse remark recorded in his ACRs for the period from 2002 to 2008. According to t he petitioner, recording of adverse remarks in the ACRs pertaining to the said p eriod in one go, is absolutely illegal and depicts total non-application of mind on the part of the authorities. 3. The respondents have filed their counter affidavit in which it has been stated that considering the view of the Director General of Police and other att ending facts and circumstances, all the adverse remarks / entries in the ACRs of the petitioner for the years 2002-03, 2003-04, 2004-05, 2005-06, 2006-07 and 20 07-08 have been expunged. However, inspite of such expunction of adverse entries , the over all gradings given by Reporting/Reviewing/Accepting Authority have be en retained in the ACR. Once the adverse remark stands expunged, the earlier ove rall gradings given by the Reporting/Reviewing/Accepting Authorities will also h ave to be reviewed and cannot be retained. If the overall gradings given by the said authorities are retained in the concerned ACRs of the petitioner, there is no meaning of expunction of adverse entries for the said years. 4. In view of the above, this writ petition is disposed of directing the au thorities to review the remarks given by the Reporting/Reviewing/Accepting autho rities consistently with the fact that the adverse entries recorded in the ACRs of the petitioner have been expunged, as stated in the affidavit in opposition. In the affidavit-in-opposition, the respondents have also enclosed the order dat ed 19.2.2011 by which the adverse entries in the ACRs of the petitioner pertaini ng to the said years have been expunged. Thus naturally after such expunction of the adverse entries, the over all gradings given by the said 3 (three) authorit ies will also have to be consistently reviewed. 5. It will be pertinent to mention here that in the affidavit-in-opposition , the respondents have stated that the petitioner’s case is being duly considere d for promotion to the next higher post. It has also been stated that the minor adverse entries against the petitioner are not held against him for promotion to the Super Time Scale of senior grade. In paragraph 9 of the affidavit, it has a lso been stated that there has been no exercise to deny the petitioner any promo tion due to him. 6. In the aforementioned order dated 19.2.2011, the authority after expunct ion of the adverse remarks, has however, stated that the gradings attributed by the Reporting/Reviewing/Accepting authorities are to be retained as per the exta nt guidelines. As already observed above, once the adverse remarks are expunged, there is no question of retaining the overall gradings given by the Reporting/R eviewing/Accepting authorities. 7. The respondents shall take necessary follow up action in terms of this order. Once the aforesaid exercise is carried out by the respondents, the case o f the petitioner shall be considered for promotion to the post of Director, APRO and / or any other higher grade to which the petitioner is entitled to, along w ith other eligible Officers. 8. With the aforesaid directions and observations, the writ petition stands disposed of, without however, any order as to costs.