1981 INSC 0102
                                                      Lakhi Ram

                                                           Vs

                                           State of Haryana and Others

                                           Civil Appeal No. 84 of 1980

                                      (P.N. Bhagwati, V.D. Tulzapurkar JJ)

                                                      18.02.1981

                                                        ORDER

BHAGWATI, J. -

1. The only ground on which the writ petition filed by the appellant has been dismissed by the High
Court is that the appellant has no locus standi to maintain the writ petition. The appellant filed the
writ petition challenging the action of the government expunging the adverse remarks made in the
annual confidential report of respondent 6. The High Court took the view that the appellant was not
entitled to complain against the expungement of adverse remarks made in the confidential report of
another officer. But this view is, in our opinion, erroneous because the effect of expungement of
adverse remarks in the confidential report of respondent 6 is to prejudice the chances of promotion
of the appellant and if the appellant is able to show that the expungement of the remarks was illegal
and invalid, the adverse remarks would continue to remain in the confidential report of the adverse
remarks was illegal and invalid, the adverse remarks would continue to remain in the confidential
report of respondent 6 and that would improve the chances of promotion of the appellant vis-a-vis
respondent 6. The appellant was, therefore, clearly entitled to show that the government acted
beyond the scope of its power in expunging the adverse remarks in the confidential report of
responded 6 and that he expungement of the adverse remarks should be canceled. The appellant had,
in the circumstances, locus standi to maintain the writ petition and the High Court was in error in
rejecting in one the ground that the appellant was not entitled to maintain the writ petition.

2. This was the reason why we allowed the appeal and, setting aside the order of dismissal passed by
the High Court, remanded the writ petition to the High Court for disposal on merits.

</html