IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. CWP No.: 7666 of 2011. Decided on: 15.09.2011. ______________________________________________ Sarwan Kumar. … Petitioner. Versus Union of India and others. … Respondents. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, J. For the petitioner : Mr. O.C. Sharma, Advocate. For the Respondents : Mr. Janesh Mahajan, Central Government Counsel. Justice Kurian Joseph, C.J. (Oral): The writ petition is filed with the following prayers: “i) That the order passed by the Secretary (Internal Security), Ministry of Home Affairs, may kindly be set-aside besides the order dated 11.5.2011 i.e. Annexure P-7. ii) That the respondents be directed to placed the ACRs containing the remarks of the I.O. as well as Reviewing Officer before the then Director General or the present Director General in the capacity of Accepting Authority for his appraisal of the same. iii) That the APARs of the petitioner for the period from 1.4.2008 to 31.7.2008 containing Below Benchmark Grading may kindly be ordered to be modified to the extent ascribing the petitioner atleast “Very Good remarks .” - 2 - 2. A bare perusal of Annexure P-7 would show that the competent authority has not looked into the matter on merits. In the nature of the grievance as pointed out by the petitioner before the Deputy Inspector General and being an exercise of statutory power, he should have considered the matter on merits, after adverting to the points raised by the petitioner. In that view of the matter, we set aside the laconic order, Annexure P-7 with a direction to the 4th respondent/competent authority to consider the matter afresh on merits and pass appropriate orders in the light of the observations made by this Court in the judgment. In case the petitioner prays for an opportunity of personal hearing, same shall be granted. Needful shall be done within a period of four months from the date of production of the copy of this judgment along with a copy of the petition by the petitioner before the 4th respondent/competent authority. 3. The writ petition is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Authenticated copy to the parties. (Justice Kurian Joseph), Chief Justice. (Justice Rajiv Sharma), Judge. September 15, 2011. (sck/hl).