Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Dharmendra Singh – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 2379 of 2023
Decided On : 24-02-2023
Writ of Mandamus - Representation Adjudication - The court directed the respondents to adjudicate the petitioner's representation within a specified time frame, emphasizing the importance of timely decision-making in such matters.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a petition under Article 226 seeking a writ of mandamus to direct the respondents to adjudicate the petitioner's representation, which had not been decided by the respondents till the date of the petition.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the petition by directing the respondents to adjudicate the petitioner's representation within four weeks and convey the decision to the petitioner within one week thereafter.
Issues: Delay in Adjudication of Representation
Ratio Decidendi: Timely adjudication of representations under Article 226
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of with the direction to the respondents to adjudicate the petitioner's representation within a specified time frame.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The petitioner has filed the present petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with the following reliefs:
"a.) Issue a Writ of mandamus or any other writ order or direction thereby directing the respondents to adjudicate the representation dated 25.05.2022 preferred by the petitioner and forwarding letter of the unit commandant 181 BN CRPF dated 28.05.2022, before the Director General of the CRPF Pertaining To Promotion, in a time bound manner; and
b.) Pass any other order in the interest of justice."
2. For the above relief, the petitioner had made representation dated 25.05.2022. However, till date the respondents have not decided the same.
3. We hereby disposed of the petition directing the respondents to adjudicate the representation of the petitioner dated 25.05.2022 within four weeks and decision so taken shall be conveyed to the petitioner within one week thereafter.
4. The petition is disposed of accordingly.
5. Needless to state that if the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision of the respondents, he may challenge the same before the appropriate forum.
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 representation seeking refixation of seniority.
The court emphasized timely resolution of administrative representations while preserving the right to appeal the outcome in appropriate judicial forums.
The court has the authority to issue a writ to compel a respondent to decide on a representation within a specified timeframe.
Public authorities must respond timely to representations made to them, reinforcing procedural fairness and the right of individuals to receive decisions.
The court emphasized the principle of mandamus and directed the respondents to decide the petitioner's representation within a specific timeline.
The court's emphasis on the need for timely decision-making and communication of reasoned orders in response to representations made by petitioners seeking relief through writ of mandamus.
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
