Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

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