Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Pawan Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
W.P.(C) 12390 of 2019
Decided On : 08-02-2023
Original Records - Quashing of Orders - Restoration of Position - The court directed the respondents to produce the original records, quash the impugned orders, and restore the petitioner to the position before the orders were passed.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought the production of original records, quashing of impugned orders, and restoration to the previous position. The petitioner had been removed from service and subsequent appeals and revision petitions were dismissed.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondents to decide the mercy petition within four weeks and communicate the decision to the petitioner. The petitioner was given the option to approach the appropriate forum if aggrieved by the decision on the mercy petition.
Issues: Production of original records, quashing of orders, restoration of position, and decision on mercy petition.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the respondents to decide the mercy petition and communicate the decision to the petitioner within a specified timeframe.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of with directions for the respondents to decide the mercy petition within four weeks and communicate the decision to the petitioner.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. Vide the present writ petition, petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to produce the original records of the case before this Court.
2. Petitioner is further seeking quashing and setting aside of impugned orders dated 15.02.2019 enhancing the penalty, the original penalty order dated 10.11.2017 and the charge-sheet dated 15.11.2016.
3. Petitioner is also seeking a direction to the respondents to restore the petitioner back in the position and to a stage at which he would have been if the impugned orders were never passed, along with all consequential benefits to the petitioner.
4. Learned Senior Panel Counsel for respondents has informed this Court that vide order dated 27.02.2020, petitioner has been removed from the service.
5. Being aggrieved, petitioner filed an appeal which was dismissed vide order dated 11.04.2020. Thereafter, petitioner preferred a revision petition which was also dismissed vide order dated 27.01.2022.
6. Learned counsel for petitioner has informed this Court that after passing of order in revision petition, petitioner approached the National Commission for Scheduled Casts where the competent authority was present on 04.11.2022 and the competent authority suggested the petitioner to file a mercy petition before the respondents. Accordingly, petitioner filed a mercy petition dated 26.01.2023 before the respondents, however, the same has not been decided till date.
7. Before commenting on the merits of the case, we hereby direct the respondents to decide the mercy petition filed by the petitioner within four weeks from today and communicate its decision thereof, with a reasoned order to petitioner within one week thereafter.
8. Needless to say, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision on mercy petition, he may approach before appropriate forum.
9. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making by directing the respondents to decide the mercy petition within a specified timeframe.
Timely decision on revision petition
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making and providing a reasoned order in cases of appeal against removal from service.
Administrative decisions must provide the affected parties with an opportunity to present their case to ensure fairness and compliance with legal requirements.
A public authority has a legal duty to dispose of a pending statutory memorial or representation within a reasonable time, particularly when the underlying grounds for disciplinary action, such as a ....
Due process requires that parties must be afforded an opportunity to present their case before adverse administrative actions are taken.
Knowledge of dismissal order and service of the order are crucial in employment law cases.
The court emphasized the right of the petitioner to file replies, appeals, and complaints against the allegations and orders, and directed the competent authorities to decide on the matters within sp....
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making and the communication of reasoned orders by the administrative authority.
The court's decision was centered around the principles of providing access to the order and ensuring fairness in the revisional trial process.
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
