* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Reserved on: May 17, 2023 Pronounced on: July 20, 2023 + W.P.(C) 13964/2021 AKSHAYA KUMAR PARIDA ...... Petitioner Through: Ms. Saahila Lamba, Advocate Versus UNION OF INDIA & ORS. .....Respondents Through: Ms. Pratima N. Lakra, CGSC with Mr. Hemendra Singh, DC (Law), BSF CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURESH KUMAR KAIT HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA

JUDGMENT

SURESH KUMAR KAIT, J

1. The present petition has been filed by the petitioner seeking issuance of a writ of certiorari for quashing of Signal DTO No.121240 whereby the Departmental Screening Committee (DSC) found the petitioner ineligible due to below benchmark in the APAR for the year 2016-17. In addition, quashing of letter dated 03.11.2020, whereby petitioner‟s application seeking grant of Third Financial Upgradation under the MACP Scheme has been returned by the competent authority citing below benchmark for the year 2016-17, is also sought.

2. In the present petition, it is averred by the petitioner that he had joined W.P.(C) 13964/2021 Page 1 of 10 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed the services of the Border Security Force (BSF) in the year 1988 and completed 30 years of service in the year 2018. Petitioner has claimed that Department of Personnel and Training (DoPT), Ministry of Personnel, Public Grievance and Pensions, Government of India issued an OM dated 19.05.2019 whereby it was notified that on completion of 10, 20 and 30 years‟ of service respectively, employees shall be entitled to financial upgradations. According to aforesaid OM, for considering the promotion of an employee, Annual Performance Assessment Reports (APARs) for the last five years had to be taken into consideration.

3. The petitioner has claimed that his Third Financial Upgradation under the MACP Scheme was due in the year 2018. He made a representation dated 05.08.2020 to the Commandant 94^th Bn BSF, i.e. the Unit where he was posted, for grant of MACP. Petitioner was informed that in the Departmental Screening Committee held on 01.06.2021, he was found ineligible for grant of Third Financial Upgradation under the MACP Scheme on account of below benchmark in his APAR for the year 2016-17.

4. According to petitioner, his APARs for five years from 2013 to 2018 were graded as under:-

Sr. No.	Year of APAR	Mark awarded to petitioner	Grading awarded to petitioner
1.	2013-2014	6.2	Very Good
2.	2014-2015	6.6	Very Good
3.	2015-2016	6.29	Very Good
4.	2016-2017	5.2	Good
5.	2017-2018		Very Good

W.P.(C) 13964/2021 Page 2 of 10 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed

5. Petitioner has averred that vide Signal dated 25.04.2019, DG, BSF notified as under:-

“...an officer may be graded as Very Good if in the opinion of the Selection Committee, his overall service record reflects that the officer has done highly meritorious work and possess the attributes and these characteristics are reflected in at least 3 of the 5 ACRs. Further in the opinion of the Selection Committee the PCR/APR/ACR under consideration of the Committee should reflect that the officer performance is generally Good during the period. There should be no adverse entry in any of the ACRs under consideration of the Selection Committee. In view of above the provisions of ACR/APR not required as Very Good and only 3 APAR out of 5 ACR/APAR required Very Good and remaining 2 are generally Good.”

6. Thereafter, FHQ, BSF reiterated the prescription contained in Signal No.00133-155 that an Officer may be graded „Very Good‟ if in the opinion of the Selection Committee his overall service record reflects that the officer has done highly meritorious work and possesses attributes and these characteristics are reflected in at least three out of the five ACRs.

7. Pursuant to the aforesaid Signal dated 25.04.2019, the petitioner submitted another representation dated 22.08.2020 pleading that out of five APARs, his four APARs were graded „Very Good‟ and only one APAR was graded “Good” and also

Click Here to Read the rest of this document