JUDGMENT 1. - Adverse entries for the year 1988-89 and 1989-90 were communicated to the petitioner vide separate orders dated 15.4.1991. Representation made by the petitioner against the above adverse entries was rejected by the respondents vide order dated 9.7.1993. Hence, the present writ petition challenging the above orders mainly on the ground of malafides. 2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties, I have carefully gone through the material on record. 3. There is hierarchy of authorities so far as annual confidential report of employee is concerned. Initial entries are made by the reporting officer. Same are endorsed by the reviewing authority as also accepting authority. It is total subjective discretion of the above authorities to make assessment and enter necessary remarks in the annual confidential reports. This court under writ jurisdiction dot not sit in appeal over such assessments and discretions used by the authorities and make a fresh assessment of performance of the particular officer for the relevant year. Though certain allegations have been made by the petitioner, however, the concerned persons have not been impleaded so far, not any material has been placed on record to substantiate such allegations. This court in the case of Tayyab Ali v. State of Rajasthan, 1988(2) RLW 50 has held that an adverse entry or an order rejecting representation against the same by itself is not appealable even before the appellate Tribunal. The court observed that an adverse entry by itself does not visit the Government servant with any immediate denial or variation of any service condition to his disadvantage even though it constitutes significant material relevant for determination of future service conditions. As such, the matters in respect of which such adverse entry may act to disadvantage of the Government servant, i.e. seniority, promotion, confirmation, pay fixation and other service conditions are concerned, the Government servants can always raise grievance before the Tribunal in respect of above specified grievance before the Tribunal in respect of above specified matters. At that point of time, the correctness of adverse entry in Annual Performance Appraisal Report can also be assailed for the purpose of showing that the impugned order is without any proper or reasonable basis. In that case, the limitation prescribed for approaching the Tribunal shall be reckoned from the date of consequent adverse order made subsequently. At that point of time, the correctness of adverse entry in Annual Performance Appraisal Report can also be assailed for the purpose of showing that the impugned order is without any proper or reasonable basis. In that case, the limitation prescribed for approaching the Tribunal shall be reckoned from the date of consequent adverse order made subsequently. This court under Article 226 has very limitation jurisdiction so far as such matters are concerned. 4. Having considered entire facts and circumstances, the relief, as sought, cannot be granted by this court. The writ petition is dismissed accordingly as having no merits.Writ Petition Dismissed. *******