S.J. Mukhopadhaya, J.@mdashThe appellant-writ petitioner (V. Vijayakrishnan), Transmission Executive under the Commercial Broadcasting
Service of All India Radio, Chennai, was communicated with adverse remarks made vide Memorandum, dated 30.6.1997 for the period 1.4.1996
to 31.3.1997. The representation for expunging the remarks, was also rejected by the superior authority-first respondent - Station Director of the
All India Radio.
2. The learned single Judge having rejected the Writ Petition in question, the present Writ Appeal has been preferred by the appellant (writ
petitioner).
3. The grievance of the appellant-writ petitioner is that the adverse remarks were not based on any reasoning and have been so recorded without
assessing the total performance of the appellant and recorded by the Controlling Authority, who was biased towards the appellant.
4. Now, it is settled law that for writing adverse or favourable comments in the Annual Confidential Reports (for short, ''the ACR''), no reasoning is
required to be cited. The Controlling Authority, after looking into the performance of the whole year, generally makes an objective assessment of
the performance of the Officer, which is reflected in the ACR. In the absence of any evidence on record, it cannot be presumed that the
Controlling Authority, who recorded the entries in the ACR, was personally biased towards the appellant, merely because he wrote certain
adverse remarks against the appellant.
5. Further, from the ACR as communicated vide Memorandum dated 30.6.1997, it will be evident that for most of the work, at Part-III, the
Controlling Authority has given remarks as ""Good"" or ""Fair"", but with regard to certain actions like relations with superiors and general assessment,
the Controlling Authority has mentioned that the appellant should show improvement and was required to rise up to the occasion and to adapt to
situation in a suitable manner in order to sharpen his skills in broadcasting.
6. We find no illegality in the adverse remarks made by the Controlling Authority or the rejection of the representation seeking for expunging of the
remarks, nor inclined to interfere with the impugned order passed by the learned single Judge. In the absence of any merits, the Writ Petition is
dismissed. No costs.
