[Cites 0, Cited by 0]
Delhi High Court
Dev Raj vs Union Of India And Ors on 19 February, 2026
Author: V. Kameswar Rao
Bench: V. Kameswar Rao, Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora
$~77
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision : 19.02.2026
+ W.P.(C) 2373/2026
DEV RAJ
.....Petitioner
Through: Ms. Sonam D. Mehta, Adv.
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS
.....Respondents
Through: Mr. Ranjeet Pandey, Adv., SPC, Mr.
Ajay Pal, Law Officer, Insp Athurv
and Mr. Ramniwas Yadav, CRPF.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE V. KAMESWAR RAO
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J. (ORAL)
CM APPL. 11570/2026 (Exemption)
1. Exemption is allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application is disposed of.
W.P.(C) 2373/2026
3. This petition has been filed with the following prayers:
"a) issue a writ of certiorari or any other suitable writ or order
or direction quashing & setting aside the impugned order dated
01/12/2025 vide which petitioner's representation against the
expunction of adverse remarks from petitioner's APAR for the
period of 01/04/2023 to 04/09/2023 was rejected;
b) issue a writ of certiorari or any other suitable writ or order
or direction quashing & setting aside the downgraded APAR of
the petitioner for the period of 01/04/2023 to 04/09/2023;
c) issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent no. 2 to
upgrade the downgraded APAR of the petitioner for the period
of 01/04/2023 to 04/09/2023 from the level of "Good" to "Very
Good"
4. In effect, the petitioner is challenging the expunction of his adverse
remarks in his Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) for the period
of 01.04.2023 to 04.09.2023. The impugned order passed by the Director
General (DG), CRPF dated 01.12.2025 on the application made by the
petitioner with respect to the APARs reads as under:
"2. The issues raised vide your application dated 21/10/2025
have been examined in Directorate. In this regard, it is
conveyed that while assessing your APAR for the period
01/04/2023 to 04/09/2023 (year 2023-24), the Reporting
Officer assessed your APAR as Very Good'. However, as a PE
was under process/examination for various allegations, the
Reviewing Officer downgraded/assessed your APAR as 'Below
Good' with 'Doubtful Integrity' and endorsed adverse remarks
in your said APAR. In the meantime, the PE was finalized and
the allegations levelled against you for procurement of ration
at higher rates and assigning the duties of Battalion Adjutant to
a junior officer in violation of the instructions, was
substantiated. Accordingly, a Show Cause Notice dated
09/08/2024 proposing 'DG Displeasure' was issued to you.
Your representation dated 02/09/2024 in response to Show
Cause Notice was examined by the competent authority and
after taking a lenient view, DG's Displeasure' was issued to you
vide this Directorate Order No. C.IV-66/2023-Vig. DA-9 dated
11/10/2024. Further, your online representation dated
07/01/2025 for expunction of adverse remarks/upgradation of
APAR grading recorded in your APAR for the period
01/04/2023 to 04/09/2023 (year 2023-24), was considered and
rejected being devoid of merit by DG, CRPF vide this
Directorate Order of even No. dated 11/09/2025.
3. With regard to the terming your integrity as 'Doubtful' arro
downgrading your APAR as 'Below Good' by the Reviewing
Officer, it is informed that these remarks were statement of
facts, which were recorded by the Reviewing Officer in your
said APAR, based on your work, conduct and performance
during the period under report. Further, the allegations
levelled against you were substantiated and the PE & integrity
issue referred by the Reviewing Officer were settled with award
of 'DG's Displeasure' to you, the Accepting Authority on
26/12/2024 had upgraded your said APAR as 'Good' and
specifically endorsed his remarks as under:-
'PE and integrity issue referred by the Reviewing Officer
has been settled with award of DG's Displeasure'. I
grade him 'Good'
4 From the above, there seems no justification to accede your
request as there is no double jeopardy involved in this case.
Accordingly, the competent authority has found no merit in
your request and the same is disposed of.
5. This has the approval of DG, CRPF."
5. A perusal of the order dated 01.12.2025 would reveal that during the
period the petitioner was under process/examination for various allegations.
In fact, in the relevant extracts of the APAR, Reviewing Authority has
against column no.2 i.e. in respect of integrity, stated- not agreeing, as the
integrity of the officer is doubtful.
6. On submitting the application to the Director General (DG), the said
grading in the APAR has been converted as 'DG's displeasure' which
resulted in the APAR being graded for the relevant period as 'good'. Given
that the reason for which the DG's displeasure was issued has concededly
been not challenged by the petitioner in a Court of law, it has to be held that
the grading in APAR as 'good' cannot be interfered.
7. This we say so, because there is some basis for grading the petitioner
as 'good' in APAR for the relevant period. We do not find any merit in the
impugned APAR for the period 01.04.2023 to 04.09.2023.
8. The petition is dismissed.
V. KAMESWAR RAO, J
MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J
FEBRUARY 19, 2026
rt
