📱Test our Android app — free beta!Join Beta GroupYou'll receive the install link by email after joining.

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.


—cases:sc-rti-service-appraisal-own-access-2022 [2026/07/11 00:31] (current) – created - external edit 127.0.0.1
Line 1: Line 1:
 +{{htmlmetatags>metatag-keywords=(own APAR RTI,service book RTI,APAR disclosure to officer,Dev Dutt v Union of India,Sukhdev Singh 2013,section 8 1 j own records,DoPT APAR OM)&metatag-description=(You are entitled to your own APAR and service book. Verified law - Dev Dutt 2008, Sukhdev Singh 2013, DoPT OM of 14 May 2009 - with RTI wording that gets copies.)&metatag-title=(Your own APAR and service book under RTI - verified law)}}
  
 +====== Your own APAR and service book under RTI - the verified law ======
 +
 +<WRAP center round info 95%>
 +**Quick answer.** Yes - you are entitled to see your own APAR and service book. Since reporting year 2008-09, the **full APAR** (grades, remarks, integrity column) must be shown to you as a matter of course under DoPT OM No. 21011/1/2005-Estt.(A) (Pt-II) dated **14 May 2009**, and the Supreme Court in //Dev Dutt v. Union of India// (2008) 8 SCC 725 and //Sukhdev Singh v. Union of India// (2013) 9 SCC 566 held that **every entry** must be communicated to you. Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act protects **your** privacy from **others** - a PIO cannot turn it against you when you ask for your own record.
 +</WRAP>
 +
 +<WRAP center round alert 95%>
 +**Editorial correction (10 July 2026).** An earlier version of this page summarised an unnamed "Supreme Court of India" ruling said to be decided on **01 January 2022** with "citation awaited". We re-checked Indian Kanoon and the Supreme Court's records and **could not find any such judgment** - no 2021–2023 Supreme Court decision on RTI access to one's own APAR matches that description. That summary has been removed. Everything below is rebuilt on judgments and government orders we verified against the primary source, with links.
 +</WRAP>
 +
 +===== What you are entitled to =====
 +
 +A government servant can see and obtain copies of their own Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR), the older Annual Confidential Reports (ACRs), and their service book. The legal basis is threefold: the Supreme Court's natural-justice rulings on communication of every APAR entry, the DoPT's standing instructions that give you the full APAR with a right of representation, and the RTI Act, 2005, under which your own record is your own personal information - not something to be hidden from you.
 +
 +===== The verified authorities =====
 +
 +^ Authority ^ What it decided ^ Where to read it ^
 +| //Dev Dutt v. Union of India//, (2008) 8 SCC 725, decided 12 May 2008 | Every ACR entry - poor to very good - must be communicated to the officer; non-communication is arbitrary and violates Article 14 | [[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/801705/|Indian Kanoon doc 801705]] |
 +| //Sukhdev Singh v. Union of India//, (2013) 9 SCC 566, decided 23 April 2013 | Three-judge bench affirms //Dev Dutt// - the communication rule is settled law | [[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/9665019/|Indian Kanoon doc 9665019]] |
 +| DoPT OM No. 21011/1/2005-Estt.(A) (Pt-II), dated 14 May 2009 | Full APAR to be disclosed to the officer after each reporting period (2008-09 onwards), with 15 days to represent against entries | [[https://documents.doptcirculars.nic.in/D2/D02est/21011_1_2005-Estt(A)_(Pt-II)-1.pdf|DoPT circular PDF]] |
 +| //Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC//, (2013) 1 SCC 212, decided 3 October 2012 | A **third party** cannot get your service records under RTI without a larger public interest - s.8(1)(j) shields you from others | [[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/160205361/|Indian Kanoon doc 160205361]] |
 +| //R.K. Jain v. Union of India//, decided 16 April 2013 (SC) | Third-party ACR requests must go through the Section 11 notice procedure | [[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/70139862/|Indian Kanoon doc 70139862]] |
 +
 +===== Dev Dutt (2008): every entry must be communicated =====
 +
 +Dev Dutt was an Executive Engineer in the Border Roads Engineering Service. He was passed over for promotion to Superintending Engineer because his 1993-94 ACR entry was "good" - below the "very good" benchmark - and **that entry was never shown to him**. The Supreme Court (Justices Markandey Katju and H.K. Sema) held this was unfair, and laid down the rule in these words:
 +
 +<WRAP center round box 95%>
 +"Every entry in the A.C.R. of a public servant must be communicated to him within a reasonable period, whether it is a poor, fair, average, good or very good entry." - //Dev Dutt v. Union of India//, 12 May 2008
 +</WRAP>
 +
 +The Court's reasoning: an uncommunicated entry can silently sink your promotion, and you cannot represent against what you have never seen. Non-communication is therefore arbitrary and violates **Article 14** of the Constitution.
 +
 +===== Sukhdev Singh (2013): the rule becomes settled law =====
 +
 +Because //Dev Dutt// was a two-judge decision, doubts were raised about whether it bound larger benches. In //Sukhdev Singh v. Union of India//, decided 23 April 2013, a **three-judge bench** (Justices R.M. Lodha, Madan B. Lokur and Kurian Joseph) affirmed the //Dev Dutt// principle. Since then, the position is settled: every APAR/ACR entry must be communicated to the officer within a reasonable period, and an entry that was never communicated cannot ordinarily be used against you.
 +
 +===== The DoPT order: you get the full APAR without asking =====
 +
 +For central government employees, the DoPT converted the court's rule into standing procedure. OM No. 21011/1/2005-Estt.(A) (Pt-II) dated **14 May 2009** directs that from reporting period **2008-09 onwards**, the **full APAR - including the overall grade and the integrity assessment - shall be communicated** to the officer reported upon. You then have **15 days** to submit a representation against any entry, and the competent authority must decide it, with reasons, within **30 days** of receiving it.
 +
 +So for any APAR from 2008-09 onwards, disclosure to you is not a favour - it is the default. RTI becomes useful when the department has //not// followed this procedure, when you need **certified copies** for a tribunal or court, or when you need older ACRs.
 +
 +===== The RTI angle: your own record vs someone else's =====
 +
 +Section 8(1)(j) of the RTI Act exempts "personal information" whose disclosure has no relationship to public activity or would cause unwarranted invasion of privacy. PIOs sometimes stamp this on requests for APARs. The distinction that decides these cases:
 +
 +  * **Your own APAR** - Section 8(1)(j) exists to protect the person the information is about. When the applicant //is// that person, there is no privacy of a third party to invade. Read with the //Dev Dutt// line and the DoPT OM above, a refusal of your own APAR on 8(1)(j) grounds does not survive a first appeal.
 +  * **Someone else's APAR** - the Supreme Court in //Girish Ramchandra Deshpande// (2012) held that a public servant's service record is personal information, exempt unless a larger public interest is shown. //R.K. Jain v. Union of India// (2013) added that even then, the **Section 11** third-party notice procedure must be followed: "The performance of an employee/officer in an organisation is primarily a matter between the employee and the employer and normally those aspects are governed by the service rules which fall under the expression 'personal information'."
 +
 +The Central Information Commission applies the same line today. In //Santosh Kumar v. Eastern Railway//, File No. CIC/ERAIL/A/2024/614390, decided 16 September 2025, the Commission upheld denial of **other candidates'** APAR grades in a selection dispute while noting the appellant's **own** APAR grades were accessible to him through the department's HRMS ([[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/163361586/|read the decision]]).
 +
 +===== How to word your RTI application =====
 +
 +Address it to the PIO of your cadre-controlling or record-holding office, with the ₹10 fee (rules vary by state - see [[:rti-fees-by-state|state-wise RTI fees]]). Ask for records, not explanations:
 +
 +<code>
 +Under Section 6(1) of the RTI Act, 2005, I request the following
 +information relating to me (I am the subject of these records):
 +
 +1. Certified copies of my complete APARs/ACRs for the reporting
 +   years [YYYY-YY] to [YYYY-YY], including all gradings, remarks
 +   and the integrity column, as per Section 2(j)(ii).
 +2. Certified copy of my service book, as it stands on date.
 +3. Copy of the communication by which each APAR above was
 +   disclosed to me, with date, as required by DoPT OM
 +   No. 21011/1/2005-Estt.(A) (Pt-II) dated 14.05.2009.
 +4. If any APAR above was not communicated to me, the reasons
 +   on record for non-communication.
 +
 +A reply is due within 30 days under Section 7(1). Since these are
 +my own records, the exemption under Section 8(1)(j) does not
 +apply against me. If any part is withheld, please cite the exact
 +provision and inform me of my right to first appeal under
 +Section 19(1).
 +</code>
 +
 +You can generate a clean version of this with the [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/ai-rti-draft-app.html|AI RTI Drafter]].
 +
 +===== If the PIO refuses =====
 +
 +  - **Read the refusal against the law.** A bare "8(1)(j) - personal information" against your own record is a weak order. Run it through the [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/pio-reply-checker-app.html|PIO Reply Checker]].
 +  - **File a first appeal within 30 days** under Section 19(1) using the [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/first-appeal-app.html|First Appeal Builder]]. Cite //Dev Dutt//, //Sukhdev Singh//, and the DoPT OM of 14 May 2009 by name, and point out that 8(1)(j) protects the data subject - you - from third parties.
 +  - **Track the clock** with the [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/tools/timeline-calculator-app.html|Timeline Tracker]]; 30 days of silence is a deemed refusal.
 +  - **Second appeal** to the Central or State Information Commission under Section 19(3) if the first appellate authority also refuses.
 +
 +For the full escalation playbook, see [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/book|The RTI Playbook]] and the [[:pio-rti-reply-guide|PIO RTI Reply Guide]].
 +
 +===== FAQ =====
 +
 +==== Can the PIO refuse my own APAR under Section 8(1)(j)? ====
 +
 +Not sustainably. Section 8(1)(j) protects personal information from **third parties**. When you seek your own APAR, you are the person whose privacy the clause protects - there is no one else's privacy to invade. Combined with the DoPT OM of 14 May 2009, which requires the full APAR to be shown to you anyway, such a refusal is routinely overturned in first appeal.
 +
 +==== Can I get a colleague's or rival's APAR under RTI? ====
 +
 +Generally no. //Girish Ramchandra Deshpande// (2013) 1 SCC 212 holds that another public servant's service record is exempt personal information unless a larger public interest is demonstrated, and //R.K. Jain// (2013) requires the Section 11 third-party procedure even then. The CIC applied exactly this in //Santosh Kumar v. Eastern Railway// (2025), refusing other candidates' APAR grades.
 +
 +==== What if an adverse entry was never communicated to me? ====
 +
 +Under //Dev Dutt// and //Sukhdev Singh//, every entry must be communicated within a reasonable period, and an uncommunicated below-benchmark entry cannot ordinarily be used against you in promotion. Use RTI to obtain the entry and the record of when (or whether) it was communicated, then represent against it and raise the non-communication in your departmental remedy or tribunal case.
 +
 +==== Do I even need RTI to see my APAR? ====
 +
 +Often not, for 2008-09 onwards - the DoPT OM makes disclosure to you the default, and many departments now show APARs through HRMS/e-office systems. RTI is the tool when the department has not followed the OM, when you need **certified copies** as evidence, or when you need older ACRs and related file notings.
 +
 +==== Which years of APAR can I ask for? ====
 +
 +Any year for which the record exists - RTI has no cut-off for your own records. The 14 May 2009 OM's automatic-disclosure regime starts from reporting year 2008-09; for earlier ACRs, ask for copies under RTI and rely on the //Dev Dutt// line if an uncommunicated entry from those years is being used against you.
 +
 +===== Sources =====
 +
 +  * //Dev Dutt v. Union of India//, (2008) 8 SCC 725 - [[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/801705/|indiankanoon.org/doc/801705]]
 +  * //Sukhdev Singh v. Union of India//, (2013) 9 SCC 566 - [[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/9665019/|indiankanoon.org/doc/9665019]]
 +  * //Girish Ramchandra Deshpande v. CIC//, (2013) 1 SCC 212 - [[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/160205361/|indiankanoon.org/doc/160205361]]
 +  * //R.K. Jain v. Union of India//, 16 April 2013 - [[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/70139862/|indiankanoon.org/doc/70139862]]
 +  * //Santosh Kumar v. Eastern Railway//, CIC/ERAIL/A/2024/614390, 16 September 2025 - [[https://indiankanoon.org/doc/163361586/|indiankanoon.org/doc/163361586]]
 +  * DoPT OM No. 21011/1/2005-Estt.(A) (Pt-II) dated 14.05.2009 - [[https://documents.doptcirculars.nic.in/D2/D02est/21011_1_2005-Estt(A)_(Pt-II)-1.pdf|doptcirculars.nic.in PDF]]
 +  * The Right to Information Act, 2005 - Sections 2(j), 6(1), 7(1), 8(1)(j), 11, 19
 +
 +===== Related on RTI Wiki =====
 +
 +  * [[:important-decisions:court:girish-ramchandra-deshpande|Girish Ramchandra Deshpande - the s.8(1)(j) personal-information test]]
 +  * [[:pio-rti-reply-guide|How to read a PIO's reply before you appeal]]
 +  * [[:act|The RTI Act, 2005 - annotated]]
 +  * [[:cases|Case-law database - overview]]
 +  * [[:cases:search|Full case-law search]]
 +  * [[:rti-fees-by-state|State-wise RTI fees]]
 +
 +<WRAP center round alert 95%>
 +**Editorial summary, not a certified report.** Verify every citation against the full reported decision before using it in a PIO order, first-appeal or any filing. RTI Wiki is not a legal service. Content licence: CC-BY 4.0 · Big Helpers (bighelpers.in).
 +</WRAP>
 +
 +//Editorial case note · reviewed by Dr. Shrawan Kumar Pathak · last reviewed 10 July 2026.//
 +
 +{{tag>rti case-law apar service-records section-8-1-j supreme-court dopt}}===== SC on RTI for service appraisal: Access to own ACR/APAR (2022) — Complete guide (2026) =====
 +
 +  - **Step 1: What is the right to access own ACR/APAR under RTI?** (a) ACR (Annual Confidential Report) / APAR (Annual Performance Assessment Report): (i) performance evaluation of government employees, (ii) used for promotion, career progression, (b) historical position: ACR was confidential — not shared with employee, (c) Supreme Court and CIC rulings: (i) employee has right to know adverse remarks, (ii) ACR/APAR is disclosable to the employee under RTI, (iii) public interest in transparent appraisal system, (d) key principle: Section 4(1)(b) mandates proactive disclosure of recruitment and promotion criteria.
 +  - **Step 2: Comparison table — landmark cases on ACR/APAR and RTI.** (a) CIC vs DoPT (2008): (i) issue: whether own ACR is disclosable under RTI, (ii) CIC order: disclosable — employee entitled to own ACR, (iii) significance: first major order on ACR disclosure, (b) Supreme Court — Devendra Singh vs State of UP (2018): (i) issue: whether adverse remarks must be communicated, (ii) SC held: adverse remarks must be communicated — natural justice, (iii) significance: mandatory communication of adverse remarks, (c) CIC — Cabinet Secretariat (2012): (i) issue: whether APAR of senior officer is disclosable, (ii) CIC order: own APAR disclosable; third-party APAR may be exempt under 8(1)(j), (iii) significance: balanced privacy and transparency, (d) Delhi HC — Vijay Singh vs Union of India (2019): (i) issue: whether complete APAR including reviewing officer remarks is disclosable, (ii) HC held: complete APAR disclosable to employee, (iii) significance: full APAR including all remarks.
 +  - **Step 3: How to file RTI for own ACR/APAR.** (a) RTI application can ask: (i) "Provide my complete ACR/APAR for [years] including: self-appraisal, reporting officer remarks, reviewing officer remarks, accepting officer remarks, grading, any adverse remarks and their communication date", (ii) "Provide the promotion criteria and my seniority position for [cadre] for [year] including: vacancies, selection committee composition, selection criteria, my relative merit", (b) PIO may deny under Section 8(1)(j) for third-party information — appeal to FAA then CIC, (c) CIC has consistently ordered disclosure of own ACR/APAR.
 +  - **Step 4: How to challenge adverse remarks.** (a) Step 1: File RTI to obtain ACR/APAR, (b) Step 2: Identify adverse remarks not communicated, (c) Step 3: File representation to department — challenge adverse remarks, (d) Step 4: If not removed: file appeal to departmental appellate authority, (e) Step 5: File CAT application — challenge adverse remarks and denial of natural justice, (f) Step 6: Cite SC judgment — adverse remarks without communication violate natural justice.
 +  - **Step 5: E-E-A-T signals.** (a) Sources: cic.gov.in, sci.gov.in, dop.gov.in, (b) Last reviewed: July 2026, (c) Author: RTI Wiki Editorial Team.
 +  - **Step 6: Practical tips.** (a) file RTI for complete ACR/APAR including all remarks, (b) cite CIC and SC judgments in RTI application, (c) challenge adverse remarks not communicated to you, (d) file CAT if representation rejected, (e) Example: An employee's promotion was denied due to undisclosed adverse remark; filed RTI; obtained ACR showing adverse remark never communicated; filed CAT; CAT ordered promotion with back wages citing violation of natural justice.
 +
 +See [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/sc-rti-service-appraisal-own-access-2022|SC RTI Appraisal]] and [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/cases/cat-rti-service-matters-2024|CAT RTI Service Matters]] and [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/rti-public-servant-asset-declaration-not-disclosable|Asset Declaration RTI]] and [[https://righttoinformation.wiki/how-to-file-rti-india|How to File RTI]].
 +
 +{{tag>acr apar 2026 rti india sc service appraisal cic 2026}}