SANJAY DUBEY Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD learned counsel for petitioner and perused material on record.

(2.) THIS petition seeks to challenge adverse remarks in Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) of petitioner for the year 2004-2005, which appears to have been communicated to petitioner in the year 2007. Petitioner submitted a representation in the year 2007. His representation was rejected by Government vide communication dated 07.01.2008. Contention of learned counsel for petitioner is that copy of communication dated 07.05.2008 was served upon petitioner with another communication dated 21.12.2011, therefore, there was enormous delay in disposal of representation. It is contended that same recording officer had recorded the remarks on monthly progress report for the month of April, 2004 stating that assigned field work completed and petitioner was advised to submit pending final report. In this connection learned counsel has referred to Annexure-4(5), 4(6) and 4(7) annexed to writ petition and argued that once the reporting officer mentioned therein that assigned work was completed and performance was satisfactory, the very same reporting officer could not give repeated adverse remarks for finalization of project report and inadequate field stay.