--- 1 --- HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH : BENCH AT INDORE S.B.: HON'BLE MR. S. C. SHARMA, J WRIT PETITION NO. 3517 / 2007 SHARADCHANDRA SHARMA Vs. STATE OF MP & TWO OTHERS * * * * * O R D E R ( 20/9/2011) The petitioner before this Court, a Patwari serving at Indore, has filed this present writ petition claiming promotion to the post of Tehsildar on the basis of examination conducted by the State of Madhya Pradesh as per the provisions of the MP Junior Administrative Services Recruitment Rules, 1980. The contention of the petitioner is that in exercise of the powers conferred by the proviso to Article 309 of the Constitution of India, the Governor of Madhya Pradesh has framed Rules known as MP Junior Administrative Service Recruitment Rules, 1980 and the State Government has issued a Notification on 27/12/95 inviting applications from the eligible candidates for appointing persons to the MP Junior Administrative Service. The contention of the petitioner is that --- 2 --- as per the Scheme of the Examination as provided under MP Junior Administrative Service Recruitment Rules, 1980 a written examination took place for 100 marks and 100 marks were to be awarded to the candidates based upon their performance as reflected in their service record. The contention of the petitioner is that he has received 65% marks in the written examination and he has received 75 marks on the basis of evaluation of ACR for the year 1991 to 1995. However, he was entitled to receive 100 marks out of 100 marks in respect of the evaluation based upon his ACRs. A reply has been filed in the matter and the State Government has also produced the original ACRs of the petitioner received from the Office of Commissioner Land Records & Settlement, Gwalior, vide letter dt. 13/9/11. The stand of the respondent State is that the petitioner has received 65 marks in the written examination and he has received 'Kha' grading in the year 1991, 'K+' grading in the year 1992, 'Kha' grading in the year 1993, 'Ga' grading in the year 1994 and again 'Kha' grading in the year 1995 meaning thereby he has received, 15, 20, 15, 10 and 15 marks respectively by virtue of his performance in the ACRs, totalling to 75 marks. Respondents --- 3 --- have further stated that the petitioner has received only 75 marks in respect of his ACRs evaluation, is certainly not at all entitled to be appointed as a Member of MP Junior Administrative Services on account of his lower placement in the merit list and respondent No.3 as he has received more marks than the petitioner was rightly appointed as Naib Tehsildar. In the present case, it was alleged by the petitioner that he has received K+ grading from 1991 to 1995 and should have been awarded 100 marks out of 100 marks in respect of evaluation of ACRs and it was also alleged that his service record is maintained in the office of Tehsildar, Indore and the same should be summoned. This Court has directed the respondents to produce the so-called service record maintained in the Office of Tehsildar, Indore. The Tehsildar, Indore, vide letter dt. 22/2/08 has forwarded the ACRs of the year 1990 – 1991 to 1994 – 1995. This Court has carefully gone through the aforesaid ACRs and a bare perusal of the same reflects that for the year 1990 – 1991 the accepting authority has signed the aforesaid ACR has signed it on 15/6/07. Similarly, in respect of the other ACRs of the year 1992 – 1993 the accepting officer has signed it on 25/3/07, the initiating authority has also signed it on 25/3/07. In respect of 1994 ACR, --- 4 --- the same has been signed by the initiating authority on 22/6/07 and the ACR of the year 1994 – 1995 has been signed by the so- called initiating authority on 22/7/07 and it also bears a seal of the Office of Tehsildar, Indore dt. 18/7/07. The present writ petition was filed before this court on 7/7/07 and the last ACR ie., ACR of the year 1995 produced by the Tehsildar, Indore vide letter dt. 22/2/08 reflects that the so- called ACR was received in the office of Tehsildar in the month of July meaning thereby after the petition was filed before this Court. It is really strange and shocking that in spite of the fact that the ACRs of a Patwari are kept and maintained in the Office of Commissioner Land Records & Settlement, Gwalior, ACRs were prepared afresh in the year 2007 for the period w.e.f. 1991 to 1995. The original ACRs for the year 1991 – 1995 were also produced before this Court along with a covering letter of the Commissioner Land Records & Settlement and therefore as the original ACRs are available it appears that a fraud of very serious nature has taken place in the present case in order to favour the petitioner by re-writing the ACRs of the year 1991 to 1995. It is a very serious matter and it requires a detailed enquiry. This Court is of the considered opinion that once the --- 5 --- original ACRs maintained and kept in the custody of the Commissioner Land Records & Settlement, MP, he has rightly awarded 75 marks based upon his grading in the ACRs and therefore on account of his lower grading he was not able to find a berth in the select list prepared on the basis of examination conducted by the respondents pursuant to Notification dt. 27/12/95. The respondent no.3 has received more marks than the petitioner was rightly appointed as Naib Tehsildar based upon the performance and the petitioner who has received less marks than the respondent No.3 was rightly denied the appointment to the post of Naib Tehsildar. Resultantly, no case for interference is made out in the matter. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed. However, the Collector, Indore is directed to hold an enquiry in the matter for fixing the responsibility upon the officer who was instrumental in re-writing and in receiving the ACRs of the year 1991 to 1995 afresh.The Collector, Indore after conducting a proper enquiry in the matter shall also forwarded his opinion to the competent disciplinary authority to take appropriate disciplinary action against the officers / employees involved in the matter. The aforesiad enquiry be concluded positively within a period of 90 --- 6 --- days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order. The original ACRs maintained and kept by the Commissioner Land Records & Settlement, of the petitioner from 1991 to 1995 are returned to the learned Government Advocate today itself as well as the ACRs which have been written in 2007 for the period 1991 to 1995 are also returned back to the learned Government Advocate with clear instructions to return the same to Officer In-Charge of the case in a sealed cover enabling the Collector to conclude the enquiry as directed by this Court. The writ petition is dismissed. No order as to costs. (S. C. SHARMA) J U D G E KR