Adverse remarks in an APAR, if based on extraneous, uncommunicated material, or lacking reasons, are liable to be expunged; courts can order grading upgradation to ensure fairness.

Judgment

1. Date of conclusion of arguments 18.03.2026

2. Date on which judgment was reserved 18.03.2026

3. Whether the full judgment or only the operative part is pronounced: Full Judgment

4. Date of pronouncement 13.04.2026

Per Dr. Pushpendra Singh Bhati, J:

1. The instant writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution has been preferred claiming the following reliefs:

(i.) It is, therefore, most humbly and respectfully prayed that your Lordships may kindly be pleased to summon the entire record related to A.P.A.R. of the petitioner for the A.P.A.R. Year 2017 and 2018 Part-I and on the basis of the record and submissions, a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ may kindly be issued directly to expunge remarks entered in A.P.A.R. for the year of 2017 which were written by the Reporting Authority and overall grading was given as average by the Reporting Authority which has alreay been upgraded to 'Good' suo-moto by the then Hon'ble Chief Justice Rajasthan High Court, and hence the remarks made by the Reporting Authority stood subsumed with the upgradation as 'Good' and further final gradation of the petitioner may be directed to be in the category of "Very Good"/ "Outstanding" considering the performance of the petitioner in the immediately preceding A.P.A.R. Year 2016 and examine the same and allow the writ petition by passing an appropriate writ, order or direction.

(ii.) It is most humbly and respectfully requested that your Lordships may kindly be pleased to issue a writ of Mandamus to expunge remarks enterred in APAR 2018-Part-I [Part-I for the period from 01-01-2018 to 03-04-2018] and may kindly issue directions to upgrade the final grading in the category of "Very Good"/ "Outstanding" for the APAR 2018 Part-I considering her performance.

(iii.) Any other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case may also be passed in favour of the petitioner."

2. The present writ petition has been preferred by the petitioner, a Judicial Officer appointed in the year 2005, against the entries of the remarks in her APARs as well as the orders rejecting her representations thereagainst, in respect of the following periods:

(i.) Insofar as the APAR for the year 2017 (01.01.2017 to 31.12.2017) is concerned, the petitioner seeks upgradation of the overall grading from ‘Good’ to ‘Very Good’/‘Outstanding’, along with expunction of the remarks recorded in Columns 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9, as communicated vide letter dated 26.02.2020 issued by the Registrar General, Rajasthan High Court, Jodhpur. The petitioner further assails the rejection of her representations, namely Representation No. 04 dated 15.06.2018, Representation No. 278 dated 19.10.2020 and Representation No. 275 dated 31.05.2021, which came to be rejected vide communication dated 01.11.2021.

(ii.) Insofar as the APAR for the year 2018 (Part I) (01.01.2018 to 03.04.2018) is concerned, the petitioner seeks expunction of the remarks recorded therein and upgradation of the grading from ‘Average’ to ‘Good’/‘Very Good’/‘Outstanding’. The petitioner also challenges the rejection of her representation dated 25.07.2019 against the said remarks, which was communicated vide letter dated 26.02.2020 issued by the Registrar General.

3. Mr. R.N. Mathur learned senior counsel with Mr. Lokesh Mathur and Mr. Hemant, appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that for the year 2017, the petitioner served at two different stations and achieved a work disposal o