The Principal Secretary, State of Haryana challenged before Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT), Chandigarh branch, Chandigarh the decision of the Accepting Authority, Chief Minister of Haryana downgrading his Performance Appraisal Report (the “PAR”) score - No provision in the PAR Rules indicating that a contravention thereof would render the PAR in question invalid or would be met with any identified immediate consequence.
Held: When a provision declares no serious consequences for non-adherence of timelines then it becomes directory- The Authority has met the timelines prescribed under Rule 5(1) of the PAR Rules and complied with the mandatory timelines prescribed - No reason to expunge the remarks and overall grades awarded to 1st Respondent. [Paras 19-21]
Constitution of India - Art. 226 - Whether the interference of the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (CAT) by the High Court was warranted – Principles discussed. Held: The overall grading and assessment of IAS Officers requires an in-depth understanding of different aspects of an administrative functionary such as their personality traits, tangible and quantifiable professional parameters which may include inter alia the competency and ability to execute projects; adaptability; problem* Author solving and decision-making skills; planning and implementation capabilities; and the skill to formulate and evaluate strategy - High court erred in entering into a specialized domain, i.e., evaluating the competency of an IAS officer - No requisite expertise and administrative expertise to conduct such an evaluation - Appeal allowed [Paras 27-28 & 31]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.