Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

The appellant stated that he retired from NTPC as GM on 31.12.2012 and before his retirement, he had submitted his appraisal form and was given 'excellent' rating by his reporting officer but after retirement, he came to know that that his grading was revised downward without his knowledge and that is why, he had been seeking a copy of PMS report which has not been given to him till date. The respondent stated that the appellant had submitted his PACE form for the year 2012-13 in the old PACE Format for GMs, instead of the prescribed DPE format and got it appraised by his reporting officer. She stated that the appellant was given a score of 93.84 by his reporting officer as per the old system of awarding scores for executives. She submitted that these marks are subjected to further levels of normalisation/moderation at the apex level and in the case of the appellant, the CMD is the concerned authority who would have assigned him the final marks and not his reporting officer. She stated that Performance Normalisation Committee awards the final score after seeing the comparative merit of all the appraisees at the same level in the cluster. She further stated that after considering the competitive merit of the entire population in the cluster, the appellant was awarded final score of 4.54 (bottom 5%) as per the criteria laid down by DPE. She also informed that the appellant had appealed to the CMD for up gradation of score on 07.06.2014 and after examination of his case, no change in the marks was deemed necessary and the same was informed to the appellant on 24.07.2014. On a query by the Commission as to whether after award of marks, the ACR is shown to the concerned person or not, the respondent stated that up to GM level, marks are communicated to the concerned person but the analysis of ACR is not shown/given.