AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Per: Mr. Anindo Majumdar, Administrative Member:
The applicant has approached this Tribunal under section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985 praying for the following relief(s):
“i)Direct the Respondents to recall, withdraw and/or quash the remarks by the Reviewing Authority for the FS 2019 - 20 being Annexure A1, collectively.
ii) Direct the Respondent No. 5 to review and reassess the gradings for the FS 2019 - 2020 in the light of the respective periods of Annual Performance and Appraisal Reports as on record.
iii) Certify and transmit the entire records and papers pertaining to the applicant's case so that after the causes shown thereof conscionable justice may be done unto the applicant by way of grant of reliefs as prayed for in (i) to (ii) above.
iv) Any further order/orders and/or direction or directions as to your Lordships may seem fit and proper.
v)Costs.”
Facts of the case:
The facts of the case are summarized below:
The applicant joined the department on 11.11.1992 as a Geologist (Group – A Gazetted Service). During Field Season (FS) 2019-2020, he had served as Director in the Geodata Division with additional charge of RM-II in the Eastern Region, Salt Lake, Kolkata.
The applicant’s Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) for FS 2019 – 2020 was assessed under two split periods:
Period 01.04.2019 to 25.07.2019: The Reporting Officer (Respondent No. 5/7) awarded overall score of 6.37.
Period 26.07.2019 to 31.03.2020: The Reporting Officer (Respondent No. 5/8) awarded an overall score of 6.12.
The Reviewing Authority (Respondent No. 4), while reviewing the APARs for both the split periods downgraded the overall score of the applicant to 4.50 for both the periods. In addition, he recorded certain adverse remarks on the pen-picture of the applicant.
The applicant submitted two statutory representations, both dated 03.12.2020, to the Director General, GSI (Respondent No.2), challenging the numerical score and adverse remarks for both split periods. Since, the representation were unauthorized the applicant has filed the instant O.A.
3. Contentions of the parties
In his pleadings the applicant has contended that the applicant had consistently maintained “Very Good” / “Excellent” benchmark gradings in preceding years and holds prestigious awards. The sudden downgrading of his performance (6.37/6.12) by Reporting Officers and 4.50 by the Reviewing Authority cannot be justified.
The applicant has also contended, the competent authority (Respondent No. 2) has failed to decide the statutory representations dated 03.12.2020 on merits in a reasonable timeframe.
Ld. Counsel for the respondents are summarized below:
The respondents in their reply to the O.A. have availed that the Reviewing Authority has objectively assessed the performance of the applicant.
Gradings from past years cannot be claimed as a matter of right or used as an automatic benchmark for subsequent years.
The Respondents have also averred that the applicant was subsequently promoted to the post of Deputy Director General (DDG) on 30.12.2020 in accordance with DoPT guidelines (where the APAR for 2019-20 was not within the zone of consideration for that vacancy year).
5. Findings:
The time schedule for preparation/completion of APAR as per DoPT O.M. dated 23.07.2009 (Annexure A-2/1) is reproduced below:
| Sl. No. | Activity | Date by which to be completed |
| 1. | Distribution of blank APAR forms to all concerned (i.e. to officer to be reported upon where self-appraisal has to be given and to reporting officers where self-appraisal is not to be given) | 31st March (This may be completed even a week earlier). |
| 2. | Submission of self-appraisal to reporting officer by officer to be reported upon (where applicable) | 15th April. |
| 3. | Submission of report by reporting officer to reviewing officer | 30th June |
| 4. | Report to be completed by Reviewing Officer and to be sent to Administration or CR Section/Cell or accepting authority, wherever provided | 31st July |
| 5. | Appraisal by accepting authority, wherever provided | 31st August |
| 6. | (a) Disclosure to the officer reported upon where there is no accepting authority | 01st September |
| (b) Disclosure to the officer reported upon where there is accepting authority | 15th September | |
| 7. | Receipt of representation, if any, from the date of receipt of on APAR communication | 15 days |
| 8. | Forwarding of representations to the competent authority (a) where there is no accepting authority for APAR authority for APAR | 21st September |
| Forwarding of representations to the competent authority (b) where there is accepting authority for APAR | 06th October | |
| 9. | Disposal of representation by the competent authority | One month from the date of receipt of representation |
| 10. | Communication of the decision of the competent authority on the representation by the APAR Cell | 15th November |
| 11. | End of entire APAR process, after which the APAR will be finally taken on record | 30th November |
From the material on record it is seen that the applicant had submitted his APAR forms for the period of 01.04.2019 to 31.03.2020 to two different reporting for two separate periods i.e. for the period 01.04.2019 to 25.07.2019 and for the period 26.07.2019 to 31.03.2020 on 01/10/2020 which is well beyond deadline as per the above time schedule (i.e. 15th April).
The reporting officers should not have entertained the APAR forms submitted by the applicant on account of late submission of the same. Instead the two reporting authorities had recorded their respective assessment on the APAR form of the applicant on 02/11/2020 and on 20/10/2020.
Further, we find that the Reviewing Officer has recorded his assessment and overall grading on the two APAR forms of the applicant on 18/11/2020 & 03/12/2020 respectively.
From the above discussion, it is clear that the Applicant, the Reporting Officers and the Reviewing Officer have all not adhered to the time schedule, prescribed for preparation & completion of APAR as laid down in DoPT O.M. No. 21011/1/2005-Estt(A)(Pt-II) dated 23.07.2009 (supra).
The prescribed time schedule for preparation & completion of APAR is required to be adhered to under all circumstances. We are therefore of the opinion that the APAR of the applicant for the periods 01.04.2019 to 25.07.2019 and for the period 26.07.2019 to 31.03.2020 ought to be treated as “Non Est”. We therefore direct that the APAR of the applicant for the period 2019-20 be treated as “Non Est”. Further, we direct the respondents to consider his case for promotion if he is otherwise eligible for the same in accordance with rule ignoring the APAR for the year 2019-20.
With this direction, the O.A. is accordingly disposed without any order as to costs.