Timely communication of adverse remarks and full service record review are essential before denying efficiency bar benefits.

Administrative instructions requiring assessment of an employee's broader service record, including the previous three years' confidential reports, must be followed before denying crossing of the efficiency bar or related promotion benefits. A decision based only on one year's adverse entry was unsustainable, especially where the adverse remarks were communicated after substantial delay and the employee was not given a timely opportunity to respond. The adverse entry could not validly be relied on, and the consequential refusal of service benefits was quashed. The matter was directed to be reconsidered by ignoring the impugned adverse remarks for promotion and withheld benefits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adverse remarks relied upon for denying crossing of the efficiency bar and consequential promotion could be sustained when the annual confidential record for the preceding three years was not considered and the remarks were communicated belatedly.

Analysis: The governing administrative instructions required an overall assessment of the employee's record, particularly the confidential reports of the previous three years, before denying the benefit of crossing the efficiency bar. The impugned decision rested only on the adverse entry for one year. The adverse remarks were also communicated after a substantial delay, contrary to the requirement of timely communication so that the employee could effectively respond. In these circumstances, the adverse entry could not validly be used against the petitioner, and the resulting orders denying the benefit were unsustainable.

Conclusion: The adverse remarks and the consequential refusal to allow the petitioner to cross the efficiency bar were invalid, and the petitioner was entitled to have the impugned entry ignored for consideration of promotion and service benefits.

Final Conclusion: The petition succeeded, the adverse remarks and consequential orders were quashed, and the respondents were directed to reconsider promotion and release the withheld service benefits by ignoring the impugned adverse entry.

Ratio Decidendi: Where administrative instructions require consideration of the relevant multi-year service record and timely communication of adverse remarks, a decision based on a belatedly communicated one-year adverse entry alone cannot be sustained.

---