Back
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
AJIT KUMAR – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
NAVIN CHAWLA, J.
1. This petition has been filed by the petitioner praying for the setting aside of the Adverse Remarks and below Benchmark grading endorsed in his Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (in short ‘APAR’) for the years 2021-22. The petitioner further prays for a writ of mandamus directing the respondents to upgrade his APAR for the years 2021-22 with all consequential benefits.
Case of the Petitioner:
2. As a brief background, it is the case of the petitioner that the petitioner joined the Border Security Force (in short ‘BSF’) as Assistant Commandant (Direct Entry) on 02.07.1993. He was promoted to the rank of Commandant on 07.10.2016, and is due for promotion to the rank of Deputy Inspector General (in short ‘DIG’). He has an unblemished record in his entire 29 years of service.
3. The petitioner further submits that he has regularly been graded as ‘Outstanding’ and ‘Very Good’ as would be evident from the table given hereinbelow:
| S. No. | APAR year | Grading |
| 1. | 2016-17 | Outstanding |
| 2. | 2017-18 | Very Good |
| 3. | 2018-19 | Outstanding |
| 4. | 2019-20 | Outstanding |
| 5. | 2020-21 | Very Good |
4. The petitioner is aggrieved of the fact that in his APAR for the period 2021-22, he has wrongly been graded ‘Good
The court affirmed that APAR grades depend solely on current performance, and that prior commendations do not alter evaluations for subsequent periods.
The failure to properly communicate adverse remarks in an APAR invalidates their use against an officer's career progression.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the violation of the principle of natural justice and audi alteram partem in recording adverse remarks in the APAR, emphasizing the importance o....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for fairness and objectivity in preparing APARs, and the court's authority to expunge unjustified adverse remarks and direct a revi....
Judicial review of performance assessments is limited, and courts do not substitute administrative judgments unless proven irrational.
The court cannot re-assess the evidence for the grading and found no legal grounds to review the assessment. No adverse remarks were made against the petitioner, and the grading was based on his perf....
The legality and infirmity of the assessment process and final assessment arrived at by the authorities.
The court holds that downgrading public servants' ACRs requires substantial reasoning and fairness; previous good performance must not be overshadowed by isolated adverse remarks without justificatio....
Service Law - Adverse remarks - Annual Performance Assessment Report - Representation against adverse remarks rejected in Rajasthan and New Delhi - Present Court doesn’t have territorial jurisdiction....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
