RAJENDRA PRASAD Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS present writ petition has been filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, giving challenge to the adverse entries communicated in the Annual Performance Appraisal Report (hereinafter for short 'APAR') for the Years 1995 -96 and 1996 -97.

(2.) THE petitioner was appointed as Naib Tehsildar in the Year 1984 and promoted to the post of Tehsildar in the Year 1988 on ad hoc basis. While continuing on ad hoc basis, the petitioner was selected and promoted as Tehsildar on regular basis against the vacancies of 1991 -92. The petitioner was transferred as Tehsildar, Mavli. During that period, he was awarded several certificates and letters of appreciation and also was given a cash reward for a sum of Rs. 1000/ -. Despite his good performance, he was communicated with adverse remarks in his APAR for the years 1995 -96 and 1996 -97. Against the Communication of these adverse entries, the petitioner moved a representation which came to be rejected by respondent No. 2 namely the Chairman, Board of Revenue for Rajasthan at Ajmer.

(3.) MR . M.S. Singhvi Senior Advocate with Mr. Hemant Dutt, Advocate appearing on behalf of petitioner contended that both adverse entries have been recorded by the Reviewing Officer and not by the Reporting Officer. The Reporting Officer had accorded 'Good/satisfactory' in the APARs and it is Reviewing Officer, who made the adverse entries. It is further argued that neither the Reporting Officer nor the Reviewing Officer ever pointed out any deficiency in the performance of the petitioner during the period 1995 -96 to 1996 -97.