Delhi High Court
Union Of India & Ors vs Jayaraj Naik on 22 April, 2016
$~31
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ W.P.(C) 3305/2016 & CM Nos.14075-76/2016
Date of decision: 22nd April, 2016
UNION OF INDIA & ORS ..... Petitioners
Through: Mr. Kirtiman Singh with
Mr. Waize Ali Noor, Advs.
versus
JAYARAJ NAIK ..... Respondent
Through: None.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAJMI WAZIRI
SANJIV KHANNA, J. (ORAL)
1. The Union of India assails order dated 1.9.2015 passed by
the Principal Bench of the Central Administrative Tribunal in OA
No.3003/2013.
2. The impugned order allows the aforesaid OA filed by Dr.
Jayaraj Naik and quashes orders dated 22.2.2013 and 6.6.2013 and
directs that the grading given in the Annual Performance
Appraisal Report for the period from 8.4.2011 to 1.11.2011 was
unsustainable in terms of DoP&T OMs dated 20.05.1972 and
30.01.1978.
3. It is an undisputed position that there was delay in filling up
and circulation at the Annual Performance Appraisal form for the
period from 8.4.2011 to 1.11.2011. As per the factual findings
recorded, the said form was submitted by the respondent on
28.5.2012 and thereafter recordings were made on 31.07.2012
(wrongly mentioned in paragraph 12 as 13.7.2012) by Ms. Bindu
Agnihotri, Reporting Officer who was impleaded as respondent
No.3 to the OA on 31.7.2012.
4. Neither the Accepting Authority nor the Reviewing
Authority had examined the said grading or observations of the
Reporting Officer. The Accepting Authority had retired, and the
Reviewing Authority was incompetent because she had not seen
the respondent's work for a period of three months or more, as
mandated.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the
respondent had delayed submission of the form. On pointed
questioning, the learned counsel for the petitioner could not state
the date on which the requisite form was made available to the
respondent.
6. It is submitted that the finding of the Tribunal that the
grading was unsustainable because it was only filled up by only
one person i.e. the Reporting officer is questionable. Reliance
placed on DoP&Ts OM dated 20.5.1972 is incorrect for the said
OM is not applicable. The aforesaid OM as reproduced in the
impugned order, reads:-
"Objectivity in confidential reports and assessment
at more than one level: In order to minimize the
operation of the subjective human element and of
conscious or unconscious bias, the confidential
report or every employee should contain the
assessments of more than one office except in cases
where there is only one supervisory level above the
office reported upon. The confidential report should
be written by the immediate superior and should be
submitted by the Reporting Officer to his own
superior..... "
It is highlighted that the aforesaid quote from the OM dated
20.5.1972 is an except and not the complete quotation. The
petitioner had earlier received clarification in the form of
communications dated 3.7.1990 and 16.7.1990 from DoP&T in
some other cases.
7. In addition to the aforesaid OM, the Tribunal had also
referred to OM dated 30.1.1978.
8. We would examine the contention, when raised, in an
appropriate case. In the present case, we have examined the form.
The Reporting Officer had recorded to the following effect "the
officer has performed well in his sphere of work. He has the
capabilities of applying rules and regulations as required in the
tasks at hand by and large. Attitude towards weaker sections is
positive." Despite the aforesaid observations, the Reporting
Officer gave overall grading of 5.5 in the scale of 1-10 to the
respondent. The impugned order records that in the other years
the respondent had received outstanding or very good grading
throughout, a fact which is not disputed and under challenge. The
petitioner has conspicuously not filed a copy of the previous or
subsequent appraisal forms.
9. In the aforesaid factual background, we do not find any
reason to interfere with the impugned order. The writ petition is
dismissed. There would be no order as to costs.
SANJIV KHANNA, J
NAJMI WAZIRI, J
APRIL 22, 2016/akz
