New Delhi, Oct 11, 2024
The Delhi High Court has reiterated that Annual Performance Assessment Reports (APAR) should be written by superior officers with objectivity, impartiality and fair assessment without any prejudice.
The observation was made by a Bench of Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur as it heard a plea against the rejection of the petitioner’s representation seeking revision of the overall numerical grading given in 2012-13 APAR and expunging of the adverse remark.
The petitioner, who joined ITBP in 2005 and was promoted to the post of Deputy Commandant (T) Ops in May 2010, alleged mala fide against the superior officer.
In 2012, the petitioner found certain irregularities in the telecom store and reported the same to the Commandant (Vigilance). The petitioner contended that being aggrieved, the superior officer downgraded his performance for the assessment years 2012-13 and 2013-14.
Further, he stated that recording of the APAR is vitiated by bias and bias is not required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt but only the reasonable likelihood of bias that needs to be shown.
On the other hand, the counsel for the respondents submitted that merely because the petitioner had made a complaint regarding the store and later complained to the Commandant (Vigilance), would not give rise to any apprehension of bias.
She added that the remarks given by the Initiating Officer were duly considered by the Reviewing Officer and also by the Accepting Officer.
In its judgment, the Delhi HC noted that the grading of the petitioner for the years 2005-06 and 2006-07, 2007-08, 2009-10 and 2011-12 was varying between “good” and “very good”. It said that the Reviewing Officer agreed with the remarks of the Initiating Officer in the APAR of 2012-13 and 2013-14 and held that the petitioner failed to establish a case of even a reasonable likelihood of bias.
Dismissing the petition, it said that “the complaint of the petitioner was also enquired into by the Vigilance, however, while recommending action against others, no action was recommended or initiated against the respondent no. 4 (the superior officer).”
It reiterated, “Confidential and character reports should, therefore, be written by superior officers higher above the cadres. The officer should show objectivity, impartiality and fair assessment without any prejudices whatsoever with the highest sense of responsibility alone to inculcate devotion to duty, honesty and integrity to improve excellence of the individual officer.”(Agency)
