State Of U.P vs Yamuna Shanker Misra & Anr on 21 February, 1997
5.1 The OA has mainly taken the plea of malafide against the Respondents No.3 and 4 and tried to establish it by a host of arguments. Besides, the impugned remarks are also alleged to be without any factual basis, arbitrary and discriminatory. The applicant, posing it as a case of victimization of a whistle blower, would emphasize alleged lack of objectivity and the remarks and the grading in question not being supported by factual details. Further, the applicant would rely on the decision of the Apex Court in State of U.P. vs. Yamuna Shanker Misra & Ors, {(1997) 4 SCC 7}, to highlight the requirement of objectivity in writing of ACRs.