' S. ABDUL JABBAR KHAN (CHAIRMAN). -The appellant Ghulam Mohammad, Assistant, has filed this appeal against the adverse remarks recorded in his Annual Confidential Report for the year 1977. By virtue of this appeal it has been prayed that the remarks being against law and the procedure laid down in this respect be expunged.
2. The learned counsel for the appellant has submitted that the remarks pertain to the year 1977 and were given by Mr. Sajad Javeed Akbar, ADC (G), Sheikhupura, which run as follows.
"Not cooperative. An intelligent official but addicted to bossy & boastful attitude towards his subordinates. He was subject of a few inquiries during my tenure."
' It has been argued that these remarks had to be recorded in 1978 according to instructions contained in para. 2 of section 5 of Chapter III of O&S Vol. No. 1 (revised) page 356. Para. 2 of the section make it incumbent upon the reporting officer to record immediately in the month of January after the close of the year and to convey the same to the official concerned before the end of June of the same year. It is further argued that Mr. Sajad Javeed Akbar was transferred on 16th November 1977 from Sheikhupura, therefore according to para. 5 page 306 of the same Volume, he had to write these remarks before relinquishing his charge. In view of the above violation of the mandatory rules it was contended by the learned counsel that the remarks are liable to be expunged.
3. We have perused the record of this case and have heard the departmental representative. It is established that the remarks were communicated to the appellant on 21st December 1978 and were recorded same time near 28th August 1978-the date of countersigning of these remarks by the superior authority. The date on which the remarks are purported to be given by the reporting officer is missing. It is also verified from the record that the reporting officer was transferred from, Sheikhupura on 16th November 1977, therefore, his writing of th adverse remarks in the ACR of the appellant would be violative of the instructions on the subject.
4. In view of the above flagrant disregard of the rules and the instructions, we are of the considered opinion that these remark cannot be sustained and are to be expunged. The result is that the appeal is accepted and the impugned remarks expunged with no order as to costs.