S T RAMESH Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS writ petition is directed against the order of the Central administrative Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, Bangalore (for short, "the tribunal"), dated 13th September, 2000 passed in O. A. No. 981 of 1999. In the said original application, the petitioner herein sought for quashing of the communication of adverse remarks under various heading as incorporated in the letter from the Chief Secretary, government of Karnataka, dated 9-12-1997, addressed to him and marked as Annexure-A1. The Tribunal by its order impugned in this writ petition has dismissed the original application with costs of Rs. 3,000/- payable to the second respondent, namely, Sri C. Dinakar, IPS.

(2.) THE facts of the case, in brief, are as follows.-The petitioner was selected to the Indian Police Service in the year 1976 and allocated to Karnataka Cadre. The petitioner has held several posts under the Karnataka State and the Central Government. In the month of April 1997, the petitioner was promoted to the rank of inspector General of Police. From 1st April, 1996 till 30th June, 1996, the petitioner discharged his duties as Director (Security and Vigilance), ksrtc, in the rank of Deputy Inspector of Police. In the month of July the petitioner was deputed to Olympic Games held at Atlanta, United states of America. The petitioner was an compulsory waiting for some time. On 16th October, 1996, the petitioner was posted as Deputy inspector General of Police, CID and he relinquished the said post on 17-4-1997 on his promotion to the cadre of Inspector General of Police.

(3.) BY letter dated 9-12-1997, marked as Annexure-A, the Chief secretary informed the petitioner that in his Annual Confidential report for the period from 16-10-1996 till 15-3-1997, the overall performance had been graded as "average" and certain adverse remarks had been recorded. On receipt of the letter dated 9-12-1997, the petitioner submitted his representation, marked as Annexure-B, as provided by Rule 9 of the All India Services (Confidential Rolls) Rules, 1970 (for short, 'the Rules' ). The petitioner received an order dated 19th june, 1999, marked as Annexure-C by which the petitioner's representation for expunging the adverse remarks was rejected. The petitioner aggrieved by the said order instituted O. A. No. 981 of 1999 before the Tribunal under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals act, 1985 (for short, 'the Act') seeking expunction of adverse remarks.