Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

6. Denying the allegations the respondents 1 and 2 have filed an additional counter affidavit explaining that promotion as per Ext.P1 is a three tyre process. As per Clause 6.2, annual performance report for the regular employee is prepared by the controlling officer; in the 2 nd stage it would be reviewed by the reviewing officer who is free to modify it on valid reasons; in the third stage thereafter, there is a normalization process by a committee consisting of Head of HR, MD and GM and the Head of the Department. It is stated that total marks are arrived at only after all these processes based on which promotion is granted. It is stated that in 2016, the marks of Ms. Preethi was increased from 53.375 to 59.85 after normalization process and the marks of 3 rd WP(C).No.37490 OF 2017(I) respondent, who obtained 61.775 marks in the performance appraisal, was reduced to 58.8 in the normalisation process. It is stated that the total marks of Ms. Preethi was thus 79.85 and that of 3 rd respondent was 73.8. According to them corrections if any, are only with respect to calculation mistakes, which are done in all reports. It is stated that the 3rd respondent has been consistently scoring high marks during the last 3 years. It is stated that reviewing officer is competent to modify marks stating reasons.