Ministry of Heavy Industries and Public Enterprises

The role of DPE in issuing guidelines/directives is clearly defined in Report no.-2 of 2013[4] of the Comptroller and Auditor General of India[5] on Compliance Audit of General Purpose Financial Reports of central public sector enterprises.

The directions/instructions are given to CPSEs through presidential directives as well as guidelines issued by administrative ministries or DPE.

Presidential directives are issued by the administrative ministries to the concerned CPSEs whenever the situation warrants and are mandatory. For the purpose of maintaining uniformity, such Directives are to be issued in consultation with the DPE if these relate to single CPSE and with the concurrence of the DPE if these are applicable to more than one CPSE.

Guidelines[6] can be issued either by the Administrative Ministries or the DPE case-by-case and are advisory in nature. The Board of Directors of the CPSEs has the discretion not to adopt these guidelines for reasons to be recorded in writing. The Board Resolution on the subject giving the reasons therein is to be forwarded both to the Administrative Ministry concerned as well as to the DPE.

In the above-mentioned report no-2 of 2013 it is also mentioned that though the DPE guidelines are advisory. For good corporate governance, there should be an appropriate mechanism to enforce accountability of the Administrative Ministries and CPSEs to the compliance to DPE guidelines. An Audit review of the institutional arrangement DPE has in place to ensure compliance with its guidelines revealed that:

• DPE did not maintain the database as to which CPSE's boards adopted its guidelines.
• DPE did not have a mechanism to ensure compliance with all its guidelines.
• DPE did not write to CPSEs for recovery of irregular payments pointed out by an audit.

Different categories of guidelines on personnel policies[7] are: (a) Creation Of Posts And Categorization (b) Composition Of Board Of Directors (c) Service Matters (d) Immediate Absorption-Deputation (e) Annual Performance Appraisal (f) Conduct, Discipline & Appeal Rules (g) Vigilance Policies (h) Reservation Policies (i) Report Of The Committee To Review The Format Of Annual Performance Report (APR) And Procedure For Writing APR

Format - Weightage of Personal Attributes (Competencies, Values, and Potentials) are to be rationalized to 25% for all executives including the chief executive. Balance 75% for MOU/Targets. This is as per "Report Of The Committee To Review The Format Of Annual Performance Report (APR) And Procedure For Writing APR"

Timely completion - Performance Appraisal Process has to be completed before distribution of Performance Related Pay(PRP) as per DPE OM no 2(68) /11-DPE(WC) dated 31.12.2012.

Appeal - representations can be made against the adverse entries in Performance Appraisal Report. Any deviation of Performance Appraisal score can be appealed. Reference: DPE OM No. 5(1)/2000-GM Dated the 28.05.2009 and Supreme Court of India, Dev Dutt vs Union Of India & Ors on 12.05. 2008

Last date of appeal - Last date of appeal has to be mentioned in the Final PMS scorecard while communicating the score by reporting officer.

Time limit of Appeal - 6 weeks to appeal and 6 weeks to be readdressed.

As per DOPT (Department of Personnel & Training), OM No. 21011/1/2005-Estt.(A)(Part.III) dated 31.01.2014

The representations against the remarks or for up gradation of final grading in the APAR (Annual Performance Appraisal Reports) be considered by the competent authority objectively in a quasi-judicial manner on the basis of material placed before it. It provides that the competent authority shall take into account the contentions of the officer who has represented against the particular remarks/ grading in the APAR and also take the views from the reporting and reviewing officer.