Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(Del) 1590

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Jagdeesh Prajapati - Appellant
Versus
Union Of India & Ors. - Respondents
Civil Writ Petition No. 13450 of 2021
Decided On : 29-11-2021

Advocates appeared:
Abhay Kumar Bhargava, Advocate, S.K.Tyagi, Advocate, Ridhima Gaur, Advocate, Hemendra Singh, Advocate

Entitlement to documents and expeditious adjudication under the BSF Act.

Headnote:
BSF Act - Adjudication of Statutory Petition and Supply of Documents - The court directed the respondents to adjudicate upon the petitioner's statutory petition and supply the documents of the Summary Security Force Court proceedings, emphasizing the entitlement of the petitioner to the documents and the need for expeditious adjudication.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought directions for adjudication of a statutory petition and supply of documents related to a Summary Security Force Court proceedings.
Finding of the Court:

The court directed the respondents to supply the documents and adjudicate the statutory petition expeditiously, without commenting on the merit of the controversy.
Issues: Adjudication of statutory petition, supply of documents, and validity of the petitioner's application.
Ratio Decidendi: The entitlement of the petitioner to the documents and the need for expeditious adjudication.
Final Decision: The court directed the respondents to supply the documents and adjudicate the statutory petition expeditiously.

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. - Present writ petition has been filed seeking directions to the Respondents to adjudicate upon the Petitioner’s statutory petition dated 17th August 2021 preferred under Section 117 (2) of the BSF Act against the dismissal order dated 28th July 2021. Petitioner also seeks adjudication of his application dated 13th August 2021 preferred under Rule 129 of the BSF Rules for supply of documents of the Summary Security Force Court proceedings that took place on 28th July 2021.

2. Learned counsel for the Petitioner states that vide order dated 06th July 2021, a Record of Evidence was ordered against the Petitioner on charges under sections 16 (c), 16 (d), 26 and 20 (c) of the BSF Act 1968, and subsequently, a Summary Security Force Court assembled on 28th July 2021, wherein the Petitioner was found guilty and dismissed from service.

3. He states that the conviction order dated 28th July 2021 is not subject to confirmation as stipulated under Section 114 of the BSF Act 1968 and therefore the Petitioner is entitled to a copy of the SSFC proceeding under Section 129 of the BSF Rules.

4. Issue notice. Mr.S.K.Tyagi, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the Respondents. He states that Respondent nos.2 & 3 have no objection to supply of documents of the Summary Security Force Court proceedings.He, however, states that the application dated 13th August, 2021 allegedly filed by the Petitioner was not signed by the Petitioner. He states that the said fact was pointed out by the Respondents vide letter dated 16th September, 2021, to the petitioner.

5. Since the present writ petition is duly supported by an affidavit, this Court disposes of the same by directing the Respondents to supply the documents dated 28th July, 2021 of Summary Security Force Court proceedings, within four weeks. The Respondents are also directed to decide the Petitioner’s statutory petition dated 17th August, 2021 preferred under Section 117 (2) of the BSF Act, as expeditiously as possible, preferably within twelve weeks in accordance with law. This Court clarifies that it has not commented on the merit of the controversy. The rights and contentions of all the parties are left open.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document