GOVERNMENT
OF ANDHRA PRADESH
ABSTRACT
Public Services -
Departmental Promotion Committees - Amendment to Guidelines - Issued.
GENERAL
ADMINISTRATION (DPC-DESK-1) DEPARTMENT
G.O.Ms.No.291 Dated:
3-4-1990
Read the following: -
1. G.O.Ms.No. 187, G.A. (Ser.B) Dept,
Dt: 25-4-85,
2. G.O.Ms.No. 550, G.A. (DPC:I) Dept,
Dt: 19-11-87.
3. G.O.Ms.No. 4, G.A. (Ser.D) Dept., Dt:
3-1-90.
@@@@@
ORDER:
Orders
were issued in the G.Os first and second read above for evaluation of the
confidential reports of the last 10 years to assess the suitability of a person
for promotion. provided they relate to the feeder category. When, however, an
officer has not rendered 10 years of service in the feeder category, evaluation
of confidential reports of the last 5 years would be adequate to assess the
suitability of such officer for promotions.
In the
G.O. 3rd read above, orders have been issued dispensing with the
Zone of consideration the principle of grading and preparation 'of half yearly
panels.
In
view of the orders issued in the G.O. 3rd read above dispensing with
the principle of grading, the matter for evaluation of C.Rs. for equal number
of years in respect of the Officers who are under consideration for promotion was under active consideration
and Government have decided to adopt the guidelines on Confidential Reports
issued by the Government of India in the Ministry of Public Grievances and Pension
in Memo.No. 22011/5/86-Estt. (D), dated: 11-4-1989 with suitable modifications.
Accordingly,
the following amendment is issued to para 8 of the G.O. first read above. as
amended in G.O. second read above.
AMENDMENT
For the existing para 8,
the following paragraph shall be ·substituted:
Number of years for
which confidential Reports should be considered:
a) The Departmental
promotion Committee should consider Confidential Reports for equal number of
years in respect of all Officers considered for promotion;
b) The Departmental
Promotion Committee should assess the suitability of the Officers for promotion
on the basis of their service record and with particular reference to the
Confidential Reports for five preceding years, However, in cases where the
required qualifying service is more than 5 years, the Departmental Promotion Committee
should see the record with particular reference to the Confidential Reports for
the years equal to the required qualifying service. (If more than one Confidential
Report has been written for a particular year, all the Confidential Reports for
the relevant year shall be considered together as the Confidential Report for one
year.)
c) Where one or more
Confidential Reports have not been written for any reason during the relevant
period the Departmental Promotion Committee should consider the Confidential
Reports of the years preceding the period in question and if in any case even
these are not available, the Departmental Promotion Committee should take the
Confidential Reports of the Lower grade into account to complete the number of
Confidential Reports required to be considered as per (b) above. If this is
also not possible, all the available Confidential Reports should be taken into
account. In the case of an officer who is a direct recruit to a post in the
feeder category and who is having less than 5 years’ service, Confidential
Reports of not less than three years should be taken into account
d) Where an Officer is
officiating in the next higher grade and has earned Confidential Reports in
that grade. his Confidential Reports in that grade may be considered by the Departmental
promotion Committee in order to assess his work, conduct and performance, but
no extra weightage may be given merely on ground that he has been officiating
in the higher grade.
e) The Departmental
Promotion Committee should not be guided merely by the overall grading. if any,
that may be recorded in the Confidential Reports but should make its own
assessment on the basis of the entries in the Confidential Reports.
f) If the Reviewing
authority or the Accepting authority as the case may be, has overruled the Reporting
Officer or the Reviewing authority as the case may be, the remarks of the
latter authority should be taken as the final remarks for the purposes of
assessment provided it is apparent from the relevant entries that the higher
authority has come to a different assessment consciously after due application
of mind. If the remarks of the Reporting Officer, reviewing authority and
Accepting authority are complementary to each other and one does not have the
effect of overruling the other, then the remarks should be read together, and
the final assessment made by the Departmental Promotion Committee.
(BY ORDER
AND IN THE NAME OF THE GOVERNOR OF ANDHRA PRADESH)
G.R. NAIR
Chief
Secretary to Government
