A.K. VARSHNEY Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant is an officer in the Indian Forest Service in the Gujarat Cadre. He is seeking to quash and set aside the Annexure A -1 communication which states that the remarks recorded by Accepting Authority on 5.4.2012 in relation to his Performance Appraisal Report (PAR) would be ignored for all purposes because the entire process of PAR writing including representation, if any, to the Referral Board must be over by 31st December of the year and as the PAR remark has not been recorded by 31st December of the year concerned. Annexure A -1 further says that his PAR would comprise only Reporting the Review Parts. The applicant prays for declaring that his PAR for the year 2010 -11 would comprise the remarks of the Accepting Authority recorded on 5.4.2012 including the overall grading granted. According to the applicant, he had been having an unblemished and exemplary service records throughout his career. For the year 2010 -11, the prescribed format for PAR in recording his self appraisal was handed over to him on 2.6.2011 instead of the prescribed date 1.5.2011 i.e. after 33 days of the schedule date of 1.5.2011. Nevertheless, he hurriedly filled up the self appraisal part and submitted the PAR form to the Reporting Authority within three days. As per the schedule, it has to be done within thirty days. Annexure A -2 is the copy of the PAR format so submitted by him.

(2.) ANNEXURE A -3 is the format prescribed the time schedule which has to be followed strictly:

(3.) IN the reply filed by the respondent, the Government of Gujarat, it is contended that blank PAR form was supplied to the applicant vide letter dated 10.3.2011 as seen from Annexure R -1, while the applicant was serving as Managing Director of Gujarat State Rural Development Corporation. The aforesaid blank form reached the office of the applicant on 11.3.2011 as revealed by Annexure R -2, relevant page of the dispatch book. The applicant came to the office of the Principal Secretary, Forest and Environment Department, Gandhinagar and informed the Accountant that the PAR form Forwarded to him have been misplaced and the same be supplied again. The Accountant sought direction in this regard on the same day and the applicant was supplied with a fresh form on 2.6.2011 as seen from the Annexure R -3 record. Therefore, it is surprising that the applicant is making grievance that PAR form should have been given to him on 1.5.2011. Since applicant is holding a very important position in the hierarchy of the IFS Cadre, this conduct of the applicant amounts to suppression of the facts. The applicant had been issued a show cause notice dated 27.9.2011 and hence his statement in the OA his service are spotless is not true. As the applicant has not approached this Tribunal with clean hands by suppressing the aforesaid fact, the OA deserves to be dismissed with the exemplary cost. Remarks make by the Reporting and the Reviewing Officers cannot be completely ignored. However, as per the proviso to Rule 5(1) of All India Service (Performance Appraisal Report) Rules, 2007, if performance appraisal report for a financial year is not recorded by 31st December of the year in which financial year is ended, no remarks shall be recorded thereafter and officer may be assessed on the basis of the overall records and self assessment for the year, if he has submitted his self assessment in time. Since the applicant himself has failed to abide by the time schedule, he cannot be permitted to complain about the delay, if any, caused by the Reporting and Reviewing Authorities. There is no reason why for the relevant year self appraisal of applicant alone should be taken into consideration without considering view and remarks of the superior officer. Therefore, the respondent prays for dismissing the OA.