Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2023 Supreme(Del) 1154

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Rahul Dayaram Bhashakar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 2845 of 2023
Decided On : 06-03-2023

Advocates appeared:
Mr.A.K. Singh & Mr.Kamlesh Kamal, Advocates , for the Petitioner.
Mr.Syed Abdul Haseeb & Ms.Prerna Dhall, Advocates, for the Respondents.

The main legal point established is the requirement for the competent authority to decide the petitioner's representation regarding seniority within a specified timeframe and communicate the decision with a reasoned order.

Headnote:
Seniority - Direction to Correct Seniority - The court directed the competent authority to decide the petitioner's representation regarding the correction of seniority within eight weeks and communicate the decision with a reasoned order.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought directions to correct his seniority in the ranks of Inspector/GD and Assistant Commandant, as well as consequential benefits, as his representation on the matter had not been decided by the respondents.
Finding of the Court:

The court directed the competent authority to decide the petitioner's representation within eight weeks and communicate the decision with a reasoned order.
Issues: The issue was the correction of the petitioner's seniority in the ranks of Inspector/GD and Assistant Commandant, as well as consequential benefits, due to the non-decision on his representation by the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the competent authority to decide the petitioner's representation within a specified timeframe and communicate the decision with a reasoned order.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the petition with directions to the competent authority to decide the petitioner's representation within eight weeks and communicate the decision with a reasoned order.

JUDGMENT (oral)

CM APPL. 10961/2023 (exemption)

1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2. The application is accordingly disposed of.

W.P.(C) 2845/2023

3. Vide the present petition, petitioner seeks directions to respondent no.2 to re-fix the correct seniority of the petitioner in the rank of Inspector/GD at par with his batch-mate respondent no.3. Further seeks directions to correct the seniority of the petitioner in the rank of Assistant Commandant with consequential benefits.

4. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that for the aforesaid relief(s), petitioner made representation dated NIL to Director General/CRPF which is annexed with the present petition as Annexure P-10, however, till date, the said representation has not been decided by the respondents.

5. In view of above, we hereby direct the competent authority/DG(CRPF) to decide the abovementioned representation filed by the petitioner within eight weeks from today and communicate the decision thereof to the petitioner in writing within one week thereafter with a reasoned order.

6. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of.

7. Needless to say, if the petitioner feels aggrieved by the decision of the respondents on his representation, he may approach the appropriate forum.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document