Back
M. V. MURALIDARAN, A. GUNESHWAR SHARMA
Munna Kumar Singh, S/o. (L. ) Awadhesh Kumar Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India, through the Secretary (Home), Ministry of Home Affairs, Govt. of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(M.V. Muralidaran, ACJ.)
This writ appeal is directed against the order dated 17.8.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge in W.P.(C) No.681 of 2019, whereby the learned Single Judge dismissed the writ petition, which was filed to quash the order dated 16.1.2019 passed by the Director General, CRPF refusing to consider the representations dated 4.10.2018 and 13.11.2018 submitted by the appellant against the entries of grading “good” in his Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) for the period from 1.4.2017 to 31.3.2018.
2. Brief facts which led to the filing of the writ appeal are as follows:
The appellant joined the CRPF on 1.12.1994 as Assistant Commandant and he has always been graded “outstanding” during his command of units. While he was posted as Commandant (IRLA3998), GC, CRPF, Langjing, Imphal, he had submitted his APAR for the year ending 2017-2018 on 5.4.2018 to the Reporting Officer, DIGP, GC, Langing. The said self appraisal was accepted by the Reporting Officer. However, the Reviewing Authority in Part IV of the APAR downgraded the numerical grading given by the Reporting Officer without giving any cogent reason and the same was communicated to the appe
The court emphasized the importance of providing reasons for downgrading assessments and considered uncontroverted serious allegations in reaching its decision.
Non-communication of below benchmark grading in ACR/APAR is arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India. The rejection of representation against below benchmark grading must be....
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....
The importance of providing reasons for disagreement with the remarks and grading given by the Reviewing Authority in the context of APAR assessments.
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 court affirmed that APAR grades depend solely on current performance, and that prior commendations do not alter evaluations for subsequent periods.
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....
Judicial review of performance assessments is limited, and courts do not substitute administrative judgments unless proven irrational.
Non-communication of adverse performance assessment entries denies fundamental right to a fair opportunity in promotion, violating principles of natural justice.
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
