MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Accepting Authority's Timeliness in Appraisal Report Submission Upheld by Supreme Court; High Court's Reassessment of IAS Ashok Khemka Officer's Performance Deemed Inappropriate

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court of India, in a significant judgment, dealt with the issue of timeliness and authority discretion in the completion of Performance Appraisal Reports (PAR) under the All India Services (Performance Appraisal Report) Rules, 2007. The apex court evaluated the legality of delays in the submission of appraisal reports of IAS Ashok Khemka and the extent of judicial intervention permissible in administrative decisions.

The case revolved around the PAR of an IAS officer, Mr. Ashok Khemka, and involved differences in appraisal grades given by various authorities. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana had previously set aside an order by the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), leading to the current appeal. The key issues were:

Whether the delay by the Accepting Authority in finalizing the PAR was in breach of the PAR Rules.

The appropriateness of the High Court's intervention in re-evaluating the officer's performance.

Timeliness of Performance Appraisal Report: The Court held that while the Accepting Authority delayed the PAR, it was still within the ultimate timeframe of Rule 5(1) of the PAR Rules. This delay, per the Court, did not invalidate the appraisal.

Judiciary's Interference in Administrative Decisions: The Supreme Court underscored that the judiciary should restrain from delving into the merits of administrative decisions, particularly those requiring specialized expertise, like evaluating an IAS officer's performance.

The Supreme Court reversed the High Court’s decision, restoring the assessment and grades given by the Accepting Authority in the PAR. The Court directed the Accepting Authority to resolve any pending representations within 60 days.

Date of Decision: March 11, 2024

The State of Haryana vs. Ashok Khemka & Anr.

Latest Legal News