year 1991-92 considering 7 out of 7 outstanding/very good APARs are concerned, and the respondents are directed to show the names of merit ... requirement of having 7 out of 7 consistently outstanding/very good APARs vide notification dated 11th April, 1979. The Hon'ble Apex Court
year 1991-92 considering 7 out of 7 outstanding/very good APARs are concerned, and the respondents are directed to show the names of merit ... requirement of having 7 out of 7 consistently outstanding/very good APARs vide notification dated 11th April, 1979. The Hon'ble Apex Court
year 1991-92 considering 7 out of 7 outstanding/very good APARs are concerned, and the respondents are directed to show the names of merit ... requirement of having 7 out of 7 consistently outstanding/very good APARs vide notification dated 11th April, 1979. The Hon'ble Apex Court
year 1991-92 considering 7 out of 7 outstanding/very good APARs are concerned, and the respondents are directed to show the names of merit ... requirement of having 7 out of 7 consistently outstanding/very good APARs vide notification dated 11th April, 1979. The Hon'ble Apex Court
year 1991-92 considering 7 out of 7 outstanding/very good APARs are concerned, and the respondents are directed to show the names of merit ... requirement of having 7 out of 7 consistently outstanding/very good APARs vide notification dated 11th April, 1979. The Hon'ble Apex Court
fulfill the requirement of possessing seven out of seven outstanding/very-good APARs for preceding years; the Departmental Promotion Committee (for short ... amended vide Notification dated 30.11.1991, which provided that such outstanding/very-good APARs would be required only in five years out of preceding seven years
very good', very good',
'outstanding' and very good' respectively and that only for the
period from ... outstanding'
grading out of five APARs and the remaining one APAR being
graded as 'good'.
WP(C)No. 134 of 2020 Page
period 01.04.2016 to
16.12.2016, petitioner was graded "Very Good" in his APAR. Being
aggrieved, petitioner made a representation to the Ministry of Home ... upgrading his APAR from good to
„Very Good‟ and expunging the adverse remark
recorded in his APAR for the period from
APAR Grading
2009-2010 Very Good
2010-2011 Very Good
2011-2012 Very Good
2012-2013 Very Good
2013-2014 Outstanding
2014-2015 Outstanding
Save ... performance of the petitioner is
generally good. As the benchmark of "Very Good" in all the APARs for the preceding 5 (five)
years
required to mandatorily
possess at least five outstanding or very good APAR
ratings for the whole of such five years, out of seven
years preceding ... Very Good" and other as
only "Good"; the Tribunal was not justified in rating the APARs
for whole of these years
