ANIL KUMAR AKARNIA vs DIRECTOR GENERAL, INDO-TIBETAN BOARDER POLICE FORCE & ORS

Judgment text excerpt

$~17 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI % Date of decision: 10th December,2025 + W.P.(C) 7053/2016 ANIL KUMAR AKARNIA .....Petitioner Through: Mr. Vipin Kumar Yadav and Mr. Krishna Srinivasan, Advs. versus DIRECTOR GENERAL, INDO-TIBETAN BORDER POLICE FORCE & ORS .....Respondents Through: Mr. Prasanta Varma, SCGC along with Mr. Rajat Choudhary, Ms. Richu, Advocates for UOI. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH MEHTA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIMAL KUMAR YADAV DINESH MEHTA, J. (ORAL) 1. By way of the present writ petition, the petitioner has challenged the adverse entry and degradation of his Annual Performance Appraisal Report (hereinafter referred to as “APAR”) by the Reviewing Authority from very good (7) to very bad (3.68). 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner invited Court’s attention towards the APAR prepared by the Reporting Officer and highlighted that the Reporting Officer (Commandant 3rd Battalion ITBP, Bareilly, U.P) has given him numerical grading on the bases of weightage given in part four as Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed W.P.(C) 7053/2016 Page 1 of 6 By:NAVEEN KUMAR Signing Date:12.12.2025 17:52:21 7 which is equivalent to very good for the period between 01.10.2014 to 31.03.2015, whereafter, when the APAR was placed before the Reviewing Authority, namely, DIG, ITBP, reduced his APAR grading marks to 3.68 which means very bad. He further invited Court’s attention towards the following remarks made by the Reviewing Authority and submitted that the same is unfounded and untenable: “During the period, when the services of officer was required at BHQ for preparation for ANO deployment, be remained at Delhi for his own treatment. The officer required informed in attitude in administrative matter.” 3. In a bid to complete the narration of facts, learned