SALEEM MOHD Vs. STATE OF J&K

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE principal grievances of the petitioner is that his Annual Performance Reports were initiated by Shri JK Sawhney, respondent No. 4 in the writ petition who was also to compete with the petitioner. It is submitted that on account of this factor, the Annual Performance Reports of the petitioner were written in a manner that these were down -graded. It is submitted that he has been graded as having outstanding and excellent record throughout and a drop in the performance and down grading was done by the aforementioned officer who according to the petitioner was also to compete with him when induction was to be made in the Kashmir Administrative Service. It is also submitted that in the matter of determining the merit of a candidate when he is inducted into Kashmir Administrative Service, there is no set criteria and policy and pick and choose method is being adopted. According to the petitioner had the reports been not written by aforesaid Sh JK Sawhney, the situation would have been different.

(2.) THE stand by the State is that, no doubt, the Annual Performance Reports so far as the petitioner is concerned, were initiated by respondent No. 4, but this has not affected his cause. It is submitted that the rating which has been given to him is the same which was given to him earlier. It is submitted that respondent No. 4 has rated him excellent in certain parameters. It is further submitted that the report made by the initiating officer has to be endorsed by the reviewing authority and it is to be adopted by yet another officer, therefore, no bias can be attributed. Otherwise, it is urged that the criteria which was followed was just and proper and the petitioners cause has not suffered in any manner.

(3.) THUS , the basic argument which has been raised by the petitioner is that as the Annual Performance Reports were written by an officer who was ultimately to compete with him, therefore, damage was done to him at that stage. This led to his down grading. The respondent -State, however, has denied this assertion as has been noticed above. The learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance on a decision of the Supreme Court reported as AIR 1981 SC 2181, Dr. S.P. Kapoor Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and others. In the aforementioned case, the Supreme Court did observe that where reports are written by one of the competitor, then injustice is done to a civil servant. In para 31 of the judgment, it was observed that "therefore, it would not have been fair for the Departmental Promotion Committee to take into account the annual confidential reports made by adoctor who was competing" with the petitioner who had moved the High Court of Himachal Pradesh. Reference is also being made to another decision of the Supreme Court reported as (1996)2 SCC 363, U.P. Lal Nigam and others Vs. Prabhat Chandra Jain and others, wherein the view expressed is that if a particular officer is down graded then some material should be available on the file. If there is no reason mentioned for the change, then the down grading cannot be sustained.