that promotions are carried out on the basis of consideration of confidential reports for three years and that for the year 2012-13, petitioner's confidential report showed a 'below average' overall rating. It is further stated that during the period 2012-13, he had recruited only one agent while he had, at the same time terminated 11 of his agents. The counter affidavit further pleads that, keeping in view the fact that the development officers have no fixed hours of work, they are judged, unlike other regular class of employees, by reference to the business that they bring in. It is also stated that the petitioner himself is aware about his performance for the years and hence there is no need to communicate the contents of the Confidential Reports. An additional counter affidavit is also filed on behalf of respondents 1 to 4 stating that the rating of performance of the petitioner as below average is based on the personal judgment of the superior officer and the same cannot be influenced externally and no instructions can be given as to how a subordinate officer should be judged. It is also referred that the view of the reviewing officer in a confidential report cannot be the subject matter of judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution of India and that petitioner's performance was scrutinized
