AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
V.Rama Mathew, Member A
The applicant is working as a Senior Scientist in the Fisheries Environment & Management Division in the Central Marine Fisheries Research Institute, Kochi. His next promotion as per Career Advancement Scheme (CAS) is to the grade of Principal Scientist. Though the Assessment Committee of the Agricultural Scientists Recruitment Board (ASRB) considered the applicant and interviewed him for promotion on 19.11.2015, he was not selected for promotion to the said grade because the Assessment Committee of the ASRB acted upon the uncommunicated adverse entries/below bench mark entered in his APAR for the year 2014-2015 by the Reviewing Officer, who is the 3rd respondent, who downgraded 'outstanding' grade to 'very good'. The adverse entries/below bench mark entries in his APAR for the year 2014-2015 was communicated to him only on 10.06.2016, much after date of consideration by the Assessment Committee for CAS promotion on 19.11.2015. Subsequently, a representation was submitted by the applicant to the 2nd respondent requesting to upgrade his APAR expunging the adverse entires/downgrading/below bench mark. But the 2nd respondent with an unconsidered cryptic order without considering any of the material issues raised by him, rejected his request holding that the grading 'very good' is not an adverse entry and the grading 'very good' may be accepted. O.A.No.180/534/2017 was filed before this Tribunal challenging this. However, by Office Note dated 05.07.2017 it was informed that it has been decided to retain the remarks/comments by the Reviewing Officer. Therefore, the applicant was constrained to withdraw the aforesaid O.A with liberty to challenge the Appellate Order. Hence, this O.A.
Annexure A-2 APAR gives the details of the assessment of the Reviewing Officer wherein it has been noted that the communication skills, decision making ability, innovations to promote research and initiative to take up responsibilities need improvement and publications in peer-reviewed journal are also lacking. Based on these remarks the applicant's APAR was downgraded to 'very good'. It is seen that the instructions in O.M dated 14.05.2009 of the DoP&T produced at Annexure A-8 which directs communication of the entries and the final grading in the APAR within fifteen days immediately after the completion of entries and the concerned officer shall be given the opportunity to make any representation against the entries and the final grading given in the report within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of the entries in the APAR with reference to the specific factual observations contained in the report leading to assessment of the officer in terms of attributes, work output etc. While communicating the entires, it shall be made clear that in case no representation is received within the fifteen days, it shall be deemed that he/she has no representation to make and the APAR will be treated as final. The date of entries in the APAR was 01.07.2015, the date on which the assessment for promotion was done was 19.11.2015, the date of communication of the APAR was 10.06.2016, representation was made within 15 days ie., on 22.06.2016 and the appeal was filed on 31.08.2016. The action of the applicant are within the time frame prescribed. However, the date of communication of the entries is grossly belated and much after the date on which the Selection Committee Meeting held. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in its order in Maya Devi (D) by Lrs v. Raj Kumari Batra (D) by Lrs., 2010 (9) SCC 486 has very categorically held that the reasons for rejection of the appeal must be reflected in the order.
There are two issues which emerged over here. One is the time of the communication of the APAR itself with reference to the date of the Selection Committee Meeting which is grossly belated and the second is the manner of disposal of the representation. It is noticed that in the Annexure A-3 representation filed by the applicant specifically addressed the remarks made in the APAR including the listing of the papers which have been published by him during the relevant period, which is one of the major reasons for downgrading by the Reviewing Officer. It is also noticed that due to the factum of these remarks, marking of the Selection Committee in the score card has not taken note of any of the publication made during the relevant period and hence the marking is well below the bench mark indicated for promotion. Given the instructions regarding the manner of disposal of the APAR in the O.M produced at Annexure A-8, it is felt that the cryptic disposal of the representation by the Reviewing Officer stating that the grading 'very good' is not an adverse entry and the grading 'very good' should be accepted. Further, the appeal has been disposed of stating that the appeal has been examined and it has been decided with the approval of the competent authority to retain the remarks/comments of the Reviewing Officer recorded in the APAR without, however, making any reference to the factual challenge on the observations made by the Reviewing Officer. This is not in accordance with the rules and instructions on the subject.
In the light of the findings that the APAR was not communicated at all within the requisite time frame and the findings that the representation submitted by the applicant counters the basis of the observations made by the Reviewing Officer with specific factual observations, it is directed that the negative observations in the APAR made by the Reviewing Officer be ignored and the data submitted by the applicant regarding his contributions become part of the evaluation for the purpose of consideration for promotion. A Review DPC is to be convened incorporating the above observations for the purpose of evaluation and the applicant be considered for promotion for the year 2015 on that basis. Compliance to be reported within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. The O.A is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
(Dated, this the 2nd day of June, 2025)