Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
Lalit Maheshwari vs State Of Raj on 22 December, 2010
Author: Ajay Rastogi
Bench: Ajay Rastogi
In the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan
Jaipur Bench
**
Civil Writ Petition No.8542/2010
Lalit Maheshwari Versus State & Ors
Date of Order ::: 22/12/2010
Hon'ble Mr. Justice Ajay Rastogi
Mr. Virendra Lodha, for petitioner
Mr. NA Naqvi Addl. Adv.Gen with Mr. BS Rajawat, Dy. Govt. Counsel for respondents-State Notices were issued on 07/07/2010, and were duly served upon respondents but reply has not been filed so far. Today also, Government Counsel wants further time to file the reply.
Counsel for petitioner submits that respondents are convening the Board for promotion to the post of Indian Police Service (IPS) under IPS (Appointment by promotion) Regulations, 1955 (IPS Regulations); however, in his annual performance appraisal reports (APAS) of the years 2006-07 & 2007-08 (impugned) remarks were downgraded without affording opportunity of hearing to him. In support, Counsel relied upon decisions of Apex Court in Dev Dutt Vs. Union of India (2008(8) SCC 725) & Abhijit Ghosh Dastidar vs. Union of India (2009(16) SCC 146). Counsel further submits that this Court has also finally decided CWP-10016/2009 (Jai Narain Vs. State) vide order dt.07/12/2010; and taking note whereof, Counsel submits that downgrading remarks below the benchmark recorded in APARs of years 2006-07 & 2007-08 of the petitioner atleast be ignored while his candidature being considered either for grant of super time scale in Rajasthan Police Service or for promotion in the IPS cadre.
Without expressing any opinion on merits but taking note of the submissions (supra), this Court considers it appropriate to direct the respondents that downgrading remarks below the benchmark recorded in APARs of years 2006-07 & 2007-08 of the petitioner shall not be taken into consideration by respondents while his candidature being considered for grant of super time scale of RPS or for promotion in the IPS cadre on provisional basis, which will not confer any right in his favour and his consideration will be subject to final outcome of instant writ petition. However, it would not preclude the respondents to communicate downgrading remarks below the benchmark recorded in APARs of years 2006-07 & 2007-08 of the petitioner who if so desired may make representation against communication of downgrading remarks (supra) and after receipt whereof, respondents are at liberty to decide the same in accordance with law. List on 21/01/2011. (Ajay Rastogi), J.
K.Khatri/p2/ 8542CW2010-Dec22-GA-IsSty.doc