Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:20931 Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 3941 of 2025 Petitioner :- Neha Anand Respondent :- Uco Bank Thru. Executive Director And 3 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Sunil Kumar Singh,Kartikeya Yadav,Kumar Nilesh Counsel for Respondent :- Anand Kumar Singh Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Shri Kartikeya Yadav, learned counsel for the petitioner and Shri Anand Kumar Singh, learned Standing Counsel for the respondents. 2. By means of this writ petition, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:- "(i) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of mandamus summoning the note made by the respondent No.4 by means of which the petitioner has been given the entry of doubtful integrity which has been annexed with Performance Appraisal Report-2024 with Managerial Dimensions Column-M, Serial No.3. (ii) to issue a writ, order or direction in the nature of certiorari quashing the entry made by the respondent No.4 as doubtful integrity in the Managerial Dimensions Column-M, Serial No.3 of agreed by respondent No.4 and accepted by the respondent No.2 as illegal and non est, and order modification of the relevant remarks in a suitable manner and to order that column(s) in the Performance Appraisal Report for the year 2024 are appropriately filled in or deemed to be filled in." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has stated that the petitioner was aggrieved from entry awarded to her on 14.06.2024 when she was on maternity leave inasmuch as she was on such leave with effect from 07.04.2024 to 07.10.2024. He has further submitted that as soon as she assumed her duties on 07.10.2024, she tried to submit her representation against the aforesaid entry before the Executive Director on 17.10.2024 but the Portal could not be opened, therefore, she submitted the aforesaid grievance to the Executive Director by means of representation dated 17.10.2024 through email, as copy of that representation has been annexed as Annexure No.4 with the details of email. Therefore, learned counsel for the petitioner has requested that the direction may be issued to the Executive Director to dispose of the representation of the petitioner with expedition. 4. Per contra, Sri Anand Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the respondents-Bank has shown the Circular dated 29.04.2024 of the Bank explaining the mechanism/ modelties in respect of placing grievance before the Competent Authority. Item No.13 thereof says that if an officer is not satisfied with the grading/ marks awarded by the Accepting Authority, may make representation to the respective Grievance Redressal Authority (Competent Authority) within 15 days of acceptance of his/ her APAR by the Accepting Authority through HRMS only. The Circular dated 29.04.2024 is taken on record. 5. Sri Anand Kumar Singh has submitted that even though the petitioner was on maternity leave for the period when she was awarded grading/ marks, she could have submitted her representation online within 15 days but she has not preferred her representation within time so stipulated and copy of the representation, which has been annexed as Annexure No.4, is Off- line representation on email of the Executive Director. Therefore, in view of the Item No.13 of the aforesaid Circular such representation could have not been accepted. 6. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record, since the controversy is so precise to the effect that the present petitioner was aggrieved from grading/ marks awarded to her when she was on maternity leave and it might be possible that during that period she could not notice that grading/ marks due to some compelling circumstances on that period and she preferred Off-line representation to the Executive Director on his email after assuming her duties inasmuch as the Portal was not opened. Therefore, the facts and circumstances of the present case are so peculiar, hence, the Item No.13 of the aforesaid Circular may be relaxed in the case of the present petitioner only and that relaxation may not be treated as precedence for other employees. 7. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of finally at the admission stage directing the opposite party No.1 i.e. the Executive Director, UCO Bank, 10, BTM Sarani, Kolkata, West Bengal to consider and dispose of the representation of the petitioner dated 17.10.2024 (Annexure No.4), which has been submitted on his email, with expedition strictly in accordance with law by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, if it is so required, preferably within a period of 30 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and the decision thereof shall be intimated to the petitioner forthwith. [Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.] Order Date :- 15.4.2025 Suresh/ Digitally signed by :- SURESH CHANDRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench