Back
2021 Supreme(Del) 1423
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Eapen P.V. - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India & Anr. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 12693/2021
Decided On : 12-11-2021
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Employment Disputes
Headnote
Delay in Deciding Representation - Part Performance Appraisal Report - The court directed the respondent to decide the petitioner's representation challenging adverse remarks in his Part Performance Appraisal Report within three weeks, considering the impact on the petitioner's chances for promotion.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought directions to decide his representation challenging adverse remarks in his Part Performance Appraisal Report, which had resulted in below benchmark grading and could impact his promotion.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the petition by directing the respondent to decide the petitioner's representation within three weeks, considering the upcoming promotion process.
Issues: Delay in deciding the petitioner's representation and its impact on promotion.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for timely decision on the representation, considering its potential impact on the petitioner's promotion prospects.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondent to decide the petitioner's representation challenging adverse remarks in his Part Performance Appraisal Report within three weeks.
Dr. Surender Singh Hooda and Mr. Aayushman Aeron, Advocates, for the Petitioner; Mr. Rishabh Sahu Central Govt. Sr. Counsel with Adv. Syed Hussain Adil Taqvi Government Pleader, Sameer Sharma Advocates, for the Respondents
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral). - The petition has been heard by way of video conferencing.
2. Present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the Respondents to decide the Petitioner’s representation dated 5th December, 2019 challenging the adverse remarks in his Part Performance Appraisal Report [PPAR] that resulted in below benchmark grading for the period between 1st April, 2015 and 23rdSeptember, 2015.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the petitioner was communicated the below par PPAR on 23 rd November, 2019 vide letter dated 11th November, 2019 and was called upon to represent against the PPAR by 23rd November, 2019. He states that the Petitioner first represented against the PPAR vide his Representation dated 5thDecember, 2019. He further states that despite lapse of almost two years since his Representation and multiple reminders, the Petitioner is yet to receive a final decision on the Representation.
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that delay in deciding the Petitioner’s Representation is violative of the BSF’s guidelines contained in para 4.18 of the BSF APAR Procedure and Instructions 2012. He states that a DPC is to be convened by the Respondents for Promotion to the rank of Inspector General and the Petitioner being the senior-most DIG, is at the top of the list and the below benchmark PPAR grade will severely impact the Petitioner’s chances for promotion.
5. Since the next DPC is likely to be convened on or before 31st December, 2021, this Court disposes of the present writ petition by directing Respondent no.1 to decide the Petitioner’s representation dated 5th December, 2019 by way of a reasoned order, in accordance with law, within three weeks.
