- (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for petitioner.
(2.) PETITIONER has preferred this writ petition challenging the adverse remarks, communicated to him vide order dated 12.02.1997(Annexure-1), for the year 1994 when he was posted as Special Judge, SC/ST(Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Dausa. Following were the adverse remarks:- "Disposal of work is not adequate. Below average Officer. " Petitioner filed a representation to expunge the above adverse remarks for the year 1994, which was considered and rejected and the same was communicated to petitioner vide order dated 05.06.1999(Annexure-14). Thereafter, petitioner preferred a review petition, which was also considered and rejected and the same was communicated to petitioner vide order dated 31.01.2000(Annexure-16). Being aggrieved with the aforesaid orders, petitioner has preferred this writ petition.
(3.) PETITIONER in his writ petition averred that record of petitioner, throughout his service career, was excellent and respondent No.2 deliberately and malafidely gave this adverse remark against him in the year 1994. He submitted that he has impleaded respondent No.2 as party in his personal capacity. He also submitted that no proper infrastructure was provided at the relevant time in the Court concerned, therefore, his disposal of work was not adequate. It is also averred that no reasons have been assigned for rejecting the representation as well as review petition of petitioner. He, therefore, submitted that Annexure-14 and 16, dated 05.06.1999 and 31.01.2000 respectively, may be quashed and set aside.;