No right to get good grading in annual confidential reports: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court recently held that good grading in confidential reports (CR) is not a matter of right [Brig Rohit Mehta v Union of India & Ors]..A division bench of Justices V Kameswar Rao and Saurabh Banerjee held that merely because someone has been graded as ‘outstanding’ in earlier confidential reports, it does not mean that they ought to be graded as such even in later reports.“As such, merely because the petitioner had previously been graded/ assessed as 'Outstanding' in CR-1, CR-2, CR-3, does not necessarily mean that he ought to be graded/ assessed as such even at the time of his CR-5. In any event, grading/ assessing by the IO [initiating officer] or the RO [Reviewing Officer] or even the SRO [Senior Reviewing Officer], is not a matter of right. Thus, holding such would render any fresh CR, in this case the CR-5 of the petitioner, otiose,” the Court said..The Court made the observation while rejecting a plea filed by a Brigadier rank officer of the Indian Army, Rohit Mehta, who challenged the "above average" grade given to him in one of his CRs, even though he was adjudged "outstanding" in earlier reports..While dismissing the plea, the bench also noted that there was no provision requiring an interaction between the IO, RO, or the SRO and the candidate whose performance is being reviewed. "There can hardly be any reason for this Court to provide or give any occasion of interaction of the petitioner with either the IO, the RO or the SRO as such. Similarly, since there is also no such provision qua communicating the downgrading of anyone like the petitioner by the respondents, once again, there is hardly any occasion for this Court to do so in the present case," the Court said. .The Court concluded that there was no reason to interfere with the grades given to the petitioner and, therefore, rejected Mehta’s petition..Senior Advocate PS Patwalia along with advocates Inder Sen Singh, Abhishek Singh, Nasir Mohd and Kaberi Sharma appeared for the petitioner.The Union of India was represented by advocates Neeraj, Vedansh Anand, Rudra Paliwal and Mahesh Kumar Rathore. .[Read Judgment]