IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the importance of providing reasons for downgrading assessments and considered uncontroverted serious allegations in reaching its decision.

JUDGMENT

1. Heard Mr. Anjan Prasad Sahu, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Kh. Samarjit, learned ASG appearing for the respondents.

2. The present writ petition had been filed with the prayer to quash and set aside the impugned order dated 16-01-2019, whereby the Director General, CRPF had refused to consider the representations dated 04-10-2018 and 13-11-2018 submitted by the petitioner against the entries of grading 'GOOD' in his Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) for the period from 01-04-2017 to 31-03-2018 on the ground that there is no provision for considering the representation against the grading/ remarks recorded in the APAR after the expiry of the prescribed period of time for submitting such representations. The petitioner has also prayed for quashing or setting aside the adverse entries in his APAR for the period from 01-04-2017 to 31-03-2018 and for expunging the adverse entries in his APAR.

3. According to the petitioner, he is presently serving as Commandant (IRLA-3998), Group Centre, CRPF, Langjing, Imphal. The petitioner submitted his APAR for the period from 01-04-2017 to 31-03-2018 to the Reporting Authority, i.e., DIGP, CRPF, Group Centre, Langjing, Imphal on 05-04-2018. In part - II of the said APAR, the petitioner gave a brief resume of work done by him during the reporting period including the details of significant contributions made by the petitioner in the office through his work during the same period. The Reporting Officer accepted the said self-appraisal report of the petitioner and recorded his assessment in numerical figures with regard to assessment of work output, personal attributes and functional competency of the petitioner and gave the grading of 'VERY GOOD'. According to the petitioner, the Reviewing Authority downgraded the assessment of the Reporting Authority without assigning any reason and gave the grading of 'GOOD' only, which is below the benchmark of 'VERY GOOD' required for availing further promotion in the higher grade. The grading of 'GOOD' given by the Reviewing Authority in the APAR of the petitioner was accepted by the Accepting Authority and thereafter, the said APAR was communicated to the petitioner under a letter dated 16-08-2018 of the Spl. DG, NEZ, CRPF, with a specific direction to make representation against the entry in the said APAR if so desired and the said APAR was received by the petitioner on 28-08-2018.

4. In Para. XIII of the Standing Order No. 04/2015 regarding preparation and maintenance of APAR of Officers in the CRPF, it is provided that the concerned Officer shall be given the opportunity to make any representation against the entries and the final grading given in the APAR within a period of 15 (fifteen) days from the date of receipt of the entries in the APAR and that in case no representation is received within 15 days, it shall be deemed that the concerned Officer has no representation to make and that the APAR will be treated as final.

In the present case, the petitioner did not submitted any representation against the entries in his APAR within the prescribed period of 15 days, however, the petitioner wrote two letters dated 10-09-2018 and 26-09-2018 addressed to the concerned authorities of the CRPF requesting for extension of time for submission of his representation by giving certain reasons as mentioned in the said letters. When the authorities did not accede to his request, the petitioner submitted two representations dated 04-10-2018 and 13-11-2018 to the concerned authorities of the CRPF against the grading and entries in his APAR with a request for upgrading the grading given by the Reviewing Authority and also for expunging the adverse remarks of the Reviewing Authority entered in his APAR. However, the DG, CRPF declined to consider the representations submitted by the petitioner on the ground that there is no provision to consider the representations against the grading/ remarks recorded in the APAR after expiry of t