Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

The instant Original Application has been filed by the applicant under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 impugning five orders issued by the respondents bearing No.106/8/DGDE/APAR/2010/44/ PC-1;No.106/8/DGDE/APAR/2010/44/PC-2; No.106/ 8/ DGDE/APAR/2010/44/PC-3; No.106/8/DGDE/APAR/ 2010/44/PC-4 & No.106/8/DGDE/ APAR/ 2010/44/PC-5 all dated 29.02.2012, informing him that his representations against ACRs for the period 2000-01 to 2005-06 have been considered by the respondent no.1 i.e. Secretary, Ministry of Defence, in compliance of the Tribunals orders dated 09.02.2012 passed in OA No.3677/2011 and rejected.

17. Insofar as the first of the issues is concerned, we begin by examining all the provisions relating to filling up of ACRs/APARs and different decisions of the Hon'ble superior courts over the same. For this process, we have consulted Chapter 53 of the Swamy's Complete Manual on Establishment and Administration for Central Government Officers [14th Edition-2014]. The first part of this Chapter deals with the confidential reports while the later part deals with Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR). Under this system, consequent to the judgment in Dev Dutt versus Union of India's case (supra), the APAR was introduced in order to realize the objective of writing confidential reports, making entries and giving an opportunity to the public servant to improve his/her performance. The APAR system includes communication of overall grading and assessment of integrity to the concerned officer by giving an opportunity to make representation against the said entries and final grading within fifteen days from the date of receipt of the entries in the APAR restricted to specific factual observations contained in the report leading to assessment of the officer concerned in terms of his/her attributes, work output, etc. The new system of communicating the entries was made applicable from 01.04.1999 while the competent authority was given the mandate to consider representations in consultation with reporting and/or reviewing officers and shall decide the matter objectively based on the material placed before him within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of such representations. We have further considered the Govt. of India's OM dated 06.01.2010 which deals with the effect on modification/expunction of adverse remarks. OM dated 13.04.2010 provides as to how the below benchmark ACRs, prior to the reporting period 2008-09 and objective consideration of representation by the competent authority against remarks in the APAR or for upgradation of final grading, is to be decided objectively in a quasi judicial manner. Para 2 of the OM dated 13.04.2010 reads as under:-
As per existing instructions, representations against the remarks or for upgradation of the final grading given in the APAR (previously known as ACR) should be examined by the competent authority in consultation, if necessary, with the reporting and reviewing officer, if any. While considering the representation, the competent authority decides the matter objectively in a quasi-judicial manner on the basis of material placed before it. This would imply that the competent authority shall take into account the contentions of the officer who has represented against the particular remarks/grading in the APAR and the views of the reporting and reviewing officer if they are still in service on the points raised in the representation vis-`-vis the remarks/grading given by them in the APAR. The UPSC has informed this Department that the Commission has observed that while deciding such representations, the competent authorities sometimes do not take into account the views of reporting/reviewing officers if they are still in service. The Commission has further observed that in a majority of such cases, the competent authority does not give specific reasons for upgrading the below benchmark ACR/APAR gradings at par with the benchmark for next promotion.
8

Forwarding of representations to the competent authority

(a) Where there is no accepting authority for APAR

(b) Where there is accepting authority for APAR 21st September 06th October Disposal of representation by the competent authority Within one month from the date of receipt of representation.

10

Communication of the decision of the competent authority on the representation by the APAR Cell.

15th November End of entire APAR process, after which the APAR will be finally taken on record.