APAR for Central Government Employees – 60 Frequently Asked Questions
Annual Performance Appraisal Report (APAR) for Central Government Employees has evolved from Annual Confidential Report written by higher officials for their subordinates – Here is a compilation of some of the Frequently Asked Questions regarding APAR for knowing the features of APAR in the correct perspective.
The importance of APAR is in the interest of service and also of the officer. His work, conduct, character and capabilities can be accurately judged from the recorded opinion.
(a) To improve the performance of subordinate in his present job.
(b) To assess his potentialities and provide him appropriate feedback for correcting his deficiencies and improve his performance.
The Reporting officer has at least 3 months experience of having supervise the work on which he can base his report on the officer reported upon.
Yes. If there is delay in submission of self-appraisal by the officer reported upon, the reporting officer should give the report without self appraisal making a suitable note.
Slightest default or negligence on the part of Reporting Officer may lead to grave injustice to the officer reported upon by marring his future.
Cryptic, vague or non-committal remarks should be avoided in APAR.
A three tier system of reporting has been provided to minimise the operation of subjective human element and conscious/unconscious bias in reporting.
No. There is no provision for any authority other than the Reporting officer and the Reviewing Officer for recording his remarks on the work and conduct of an officer.
No entry in APAR 2007-08. Entry to be reflected in APAR 2008-09. An entry relating to penalty awarded should be recorded in the report for the year in which punishment order is issued duly noting therein the period when the offence was committed.
To have quantitative and qualitative assessment of work performed by a Govt. Servant with the related rewards and punishments reflected in his confidential report.
Adverse remarks are to be communicated within a period of one month from the date they are recorded, which should be done within one month of the expiry of the report period.
Within 1 month from the date of submission of representation.
Within 6 months of such rejection of representation against adverse remarks.
No. For computing period of 3 months leave availed more than 15 days is to be deducted.
Yes. Reviewing Officer can review the report within one month of his retirement. If reviewing officer is not having three months experience of the work of the officer reported upon, reviewing portion will be left blank with suitable note. This note will be recorded by new reviewing officer.
In such a case Revewing Officer himself should initiate the report as Reporting Officer and the same will be reviewed by the next higher authority.
To be got written /reviewed within two months from the date of his having been placed under suspension or within one month from the date on which the report was due. If for major portion of the report he is under suspension he should not be allowed to write/review the report of his subordinate.
As far as possible near relative should not be posted under him for longer period. If in-escapable the APAR would be written by Reviewing Officer.
Yes. Within one month of his retirement or demission of office.
An entry will be recorded in the APAR of the year in which penalty is awarded i.e. 2006-07.
Integrity column for the APAR of 2005-06 will be left blank, a secret note will be attached.
It will be reflected in the APAR of 2008-09.
One month.
Action taken by the competent authority is not in order. Adverse entry in APAR cannot be acted upon to deny promotional opportunities unless it is communicated to the person concerned, so that he can exercise his right to make representation against the same.
If the Reporting/Reviewing officer is under suspension when the APAR has become due, it may be written/reviewed by the officer placed suspension within two months from the date of suspension or within one month from the date on which the report is due, whichever is later.
No. He has to certify or leave it blank.
No, unless reviewing officer makes specific mention that it should be treated as adverse remarks.
Action of Accepting Officer is not in order as he has already recorded his agreement with the assessment of Reporting/Reviewing Officer. He should not downgrade the report from ‘Outstanding’ to ‘Very Good’ without assigning justified reasons.
(a) It provides the basic and critical inputs for assessing the performance of an officer/staff member for further advancement of his career.
(b) The officers/staff members career is either made or marred on the basis of his APAR.
In order to ensure a greater degree of objectivity and fairness in assessing the performance of Govt. servant.
(i) The report brings out distinctive merits and weakness of the reportee officer.
(ii) The assessment should be objective, free from bias, malice and prejudice.
Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat.
Yes. He is duty bound to return the reports to reporting officer for setting right such inconsistencies and irregularities.
To take corrective steps by way of advice preferably in writing wherever performance level are below targets.
No. It should not be treated as adverse if no specific mention is made.
No. It should be considered by an officer immediately superior to the Accepting Officer.
This is the best example of inconsistency /irregularity in reporting.
This is a clear case of lack of independent assessment.
Action of accepting officer is not in order. The remarks are ‘ambiguous’.
(I) 2007-08 – column to be kept blank and secret note to be attached.
(II) 2008-09 – Integrity to be certified.
Reports written by borrowing departments are not to be accepted but only to be seen by the competent authority.
Two years.
Five Years.
Yes. PCsDA/CsDA can link the entries in health column of APAR and application for transfer on medical ground and lookout for the justification of the variation therein, if any.
It is not necessary to get the report but entry to this effect is to be made in CR Dosier that he was on deputation to UN.
No. Only the space provided for in the form is to be used. No annexure is permissible.
No. Competent authority should order suitable modification of the relevant remarks in a suitable manner so that the columns in question do not remain blank.
No. Competent authority should make necessary entry separately with proper attestation at appropriate place of the report. Correction should not be made in the earlier entries.
Within one month from the date of submission of representation. Adverse remarks should not be deemed to be operative if any representation filed within time limit is pending with competent authority.
Once only. Within 30 days of the date of communication of such remarks.
Yes.
No. There is no such provision for any authority other than RO and Reviewing Officer for recording remarks/comments of the work and conduct of the officer.
If the reporting officer desires and there is sufficient proof in support.
Only cases in which the officer has not shown any improvement despite issue of letters.
Reporting Officer.
From the report for 2008-09 onwards.
The O.M. No. 21011/1/2010-Estt.A dated 13.4.2010 does not envisage any review DPC and it is concerned with future DPCs only to be held after the date of issue of the O.M.
Annexure—III to O.M. No. 21011/1/2005-Estt. (A) (Pt-II) dated 23rd July, 2009 refers. This O.M. is available in this Department’s website.
Rule 10 of the CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972 has the provisions in this regard. The latest amendment to the above rule in the CCS(Pension) Rules was notified on 23.11.2006. The procedure for grant of permission to the pensioners for commercial employment after retirement has been indicated in O.M. No. 27012/5/2010-Estt.(A) dated 5.12.2006, a copy of which is available in this Department’s website.
The cadre authority/Ministry/Department from which the officer retired has to examine the proposal with reference to guidelines in this regard given in sub-rule(3) of Rule 10 of the CCS(Pension) Rules. After approval to the proposal by the Minister-in-charge of the cadre controlling Department of the Service to which such persons belongs to, and the Minister-in charge of the Department where such a person worked during last one year, the proposal has to be forwarded to for further processing.
The formal written request of the retired officer, notes examining the fulfillment of guidelines given in sub-rule(3) of Rule 10 of CCS(Pension) Rules, 1972, approval of the concerned Ministers to the proposal as explained in the previous question, the offer for commercial employment received by the retired officer, Form 25 appended to the CCS(Pension) Rules duly filled in and signed by the retired officer, an affidavit from retired officer as stated in the aforesaid O.M. dated 5.12.2006, integrity certificate for the retired officer and a check list appending the clauses (a) to (1) of sub-rule(3) of Rule 10 of CCS(Pension) Rules and the answer to such issues. The ACR APAR dossier of the retired officer should also be linked.
1. Is APAR an official document?
2. Is it ok to give it in writing that NO apar is required when officers are against the Official and especially when he is due to retire with no promotion in sight?
Please rush your reply.
MKR