Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
ROMESH SINGH – Appellant
Versus
UNION OF INDIA – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Present petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondents to adjudicate the representation dated 13.11.2022 preferred before the Director General, BSF in a time bound manner.
2. Mr. Anshuman, learned Senior Panel Counsel appears on advance notice and has assured this Court that representation dated 13.11.2022 filed by the petitioner shall be decided within six weeks with a reasoned order.
3. In view of above, we hereby dispose of the present petition by giving direction to the respondents to decide a representation dated 13.11.2022 filed by the petitioner within six weeks.
4. Needless to state that if the petitioner is still aggrieved, he may challenge the same before the appropriate forum.
The court mandated the timely adjudication of a representation against a retirement order to uphold efficient administrative processes in service matters.
The court has the authority to issue a writ to compel a respondent to decide on a representation within a specified timeframe.
The court established that while it can direct the consideration of representations, it does not dictate the outcome of such considerations.
The court emphasized the importance of timely adjudication of representations under Article 226 and issued a writ of mandamus to ensure the same.
Timely adjudication of statutory petitions under Section 117(2) of the BSF Act, 1968 is essential, and the court has the authority to direct the respondents to adhere to a specified timeline.
Mandamus can be issued to compel public authorities to perform their duties when there is a failure to do so.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
