Delhi High Court Upholds APAR Evaluation in BSF Officer's Case

In a recent judgment, the Delhi High Court dismissed a petition challenging the Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) of a Border Security Force (BSF) officer. The officer, who had consistently received 'Outstanding' and 'Very Good' ratings from 2016 to 2021, was rated 'Good' in the 2021-22 APAR. He contended that this downgrade was unjustified and sought judicial intervention for an upgrade.

Background

The petitioner, a BSF officer with 29 years of service, was promoted to Commandant in October 2016 and was a candidate for Deputy Inspector General. His APAR for 2021-22 rated him as 'Good' with a numerical score of 5, a significant drop from previous years. He alleged that the Reporting Officer's adverse remarks were influenced by a single incident where he attended a rehearsal in civilian attire, purportedly due to miscommunication.

Court's Analysis

The Division Bench, comprising Justices Navin Chawla and Shalinder Kaur, emphasized that APAR assessments are subjective evaluations made by superior officers. The court's role is limited to ensuring that such evaluations adhere to established guidelines and are free from malice or arbitrariness. In this case, the court found no evidence of procedural violations or malicious intent.

Conclusion

The court concluded that the APAR in question complied with all relevant guidelines and was not driven by malice. Consequently, it declined to interfere with the assessment, underscoring the principle that judicial intervention in performance appraisals is warranted only when there is a clear indication of procedural impropriety or bias.

This judgment reaffirms the judiciary's stance on maintaining the sanctity of internal appraisal mechanisms within disciplined forces like the BSF, provided they operate within the bounds of fairness and established procedures.

Court Practice Community

WhatsApp Group Invite

Join WhatsApp Community