Alluri Srinivas v. Union of India & Anr.
Service law – APAR/PPAR adverse remarks – natural justice
Case brief
What is this about?
Delhi High Court writ petition (W.P.(C) 8583/2022, Alluri Srinivas v. Union of India & Anr., decided 17.07.2026, Sambre & Sharma JJ): BSF officer's APAR/PPAR adverse remarks for 01.04.2020–29.12.2020 recorded by reviewing authority Pankaj Kumar Singh (IPS) as ADG; same officer, promoted as DG, BSF, decided the representation against his own remarks and recommended rejection; MHA accepted recommendation despite conflict; held violative of natural justice (recusal expected); petition allowed — DG, BSF to reconsider remarks, entertain fresh representation, hear petitioner if required, exclude reviewing officer till Central Government decides, complete within four months. Keywords: APAR, PPAR, adverse remarks, expunging, statutory representation, natural justice, bias, recusal, reviewing authority, DG BSF, ADG BSF, Ministry of Home Affairs, service law, BSF officer.
What did the court decide?
Petition allowed with directions: adverse remarks in the PPAR for 01.04.2020 to 29.12.2020 to be reconsidered by the DG, BSF by entertaining the representation against the order of the reviewing authority, considering all points raised in the petition and granting an opportunity of hearing if required; reviewing officer Mr. Pankaj Kumar Singh (IPS) not to be party to the proceedings till the Central Government decides; decision by DG, BSF and Central Government within four months; petitioner free to question any adverse order before the competent authority. Petition thereafter stands disposed of in those terms.