Eapen P.V. vs Union of India

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Eapen P.V. – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent

Table of Content
1. court orders prompt decision on representation. (Para 1 , 5)
2. petitioner challenges adverse ppar grading. (Para 2 , 3)
3. delay in representation violates bsf guidelines. (Para 4)

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 23rd September, 2015.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that the petitioner was communicated the below par PPAR on 23rd 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 5th December, 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 th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document