SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Del) 319

H.R.MALHOTRA, MUKUL MUDGAL
LT COL N. K. GHAI – Appellant
Versus
UOI – Respondent


MUKUL MUDGAL, J.

( 1 ) RULE D. B. With the consent of counsel for the parties, the writ petition is taken up for final hearing.

( 2 ) THE petitioner in the present writ petition challenges the disposal of his statutory complaints dated 18th January, 2002 by an order of the Defence Ministry dated 8th August, 2003 and statutory complaints dated 7th december, 2002 which was disposed of by the Ministry of Defence on 23rd August, 2004 The preliminary grievance of the petitioner is that inspite of his outstanding ACRs his case has been dealt with perfunctorily and without application of mind. He has complained that the relevant paragraphs by which statutory complaints have been disposed of by two different officers by and large read almost identically. There is merit in the plea of the petitioner. We have been observing that in a large number of cases the statutory complaints are being disposed of by identically worded orders by the Under secretary of the Government of India. Except for change of the year and ACRs, the orders by and large read the same. We are reproducing several orders of identical nature. The relevant portions of various orders passed from time to time by the under Sec







Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top