TAPABRATA CHAKRABORTY J. - (1.) The writ petitioner has come up in appeal against an order dated 17th December, 2015 passed in WP 27941 (W) of 2015, which was preferred challenging, inter alia, the subjective performance rating of the petitioner pertaining to the period from 1987 to 2015, as assessed by the authorities of the Indian Oil Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as IOCL).
(2.) The appellant/writ petitioner appearing in person submits that scope for career progression of executives in Indian Oil Corporation Limited (hereinafter referred to as IOCL) depends on score in Annual Performance Appraisal and Departmental Promotion Committee proceedings. The career progression in Marketing Division of IOCL starts with first promotion as Assistant Manager. Prior to 2005 -06 the procedure for performance evaluation was a paper -based system and subsequent thereto, it was changed to a web -based system. The overall performance appraisal evaluation/assessment is a combination of Key Result Areas (KRA) and Competency, Values and Potential (CVP). Since the year 1988, the petitioner's performance assessment had been conducted in a whimsical and arbitrary manner and as a consequence thereof, the petitioner had been deprived of promotion to the appropriate posts and the consequential monetary benefits. In support of such contention, the petitioner has drawn the attention of this Court to the averments made in paragraphs 6 to 12 of the writ petition.
(3.) The petitioner further submits that the countersigning authority for the year 2010 -11 was called back after retirement in December, 2010 to evaluate CVP and his Annual Performance Appraisal Reports (APARs) had been downgraded arbitrarily in the Competency, Values and Potential systems. Challenging such downgradation the petitioner approached the appellate authority but such claim was rejected without disclosing appropriate reasons, as would be explicit from the orders dated 20thJanuary, 2012 and 12thFebruary, 2015.;