1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR. O R D E R S.B. CIVIL WRIT PETITION No.4085/2002. : : Chatter Singh Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. : : Date of Order 4.3.2009 HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMAD RAFIQ Mr. Nawal Singh for the petitioner. Mr. Zakir Hussain, Addl.Govt.Counsel for the State. This writ petition has been filed against the order dated 21.8.2001 by which adverse remarks was made in APR of petitioner of year 1998-99 and also challenging the adverse remarks so made. Learned counsel for the petitioner argued that petitioner was working on the post of Vice Principal and was taking classes of Hindi of 11th standard. He cannot, therefore, be solely held responsible for poor result of school and for not maintaining the records. Learned counsel submitted that primary duty was of the Principal and that if standard of result goes below 40%, then only adverse action could be taken against the concerned teacher. It was submitted that 2 Principal of the school, whose academic record was not good, may have to be held responsible for over all performance of school going down. Learned counsel submitted that District Education Officer had some personal enmity with Principal and the petitioner was made a goat. Learned counsel for the respondent opposed the writ petition and submitted that adverse remark was made by Reporting Officer, who when inspected the school, not only did find result of school below standard but also that relevant records were not properly maintained by petitioner. Representation of petitioner was duly considered and rejected by Joint Director, Primary & Secondary Education, Bikaner, Rajasthan. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material on record, I find that whether or not poor performance of school and the classes, which were taught by the petitioner, could be best judged by the reporting officer who has had the opportunity to actually inspect and supervise work of the petitioner and also the fact that at the time of inspection, records were not properly maintained. There is no reason why the Reporting Officer 3 should not give such adverse remarks against the petitioner, when the petitioner is not in position to dispute the fact that result of his classes was poor. This Court cannot interfere with such matter to substitute the observation made by Reporting Officer. Explanation given by the petitioner that result was adversely effected due to Lokshaba election and students came school from far and distant villages, therefore, cannot be accepted. I, therefore, do not find any merit in this writ petition. The same is accordingly dismissed. (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)J. A.Arora/- Item No.40.