Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Shri Bhagwan – Appellant
Versus
Union of India Through Its Secretary & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 4324 of 2023 & CM APPL. 16643 of 2023
Decided On : 10-04-2023
Records - Writ of Certiorari - Restoration of Posting as SI (Exe) - The court directed the respondent No. 2 to decide the Revision Petition of the petitioner within four weeks and communicate the decision with a reasoned order.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought reliefs including calling for the records, quashing the Impugned 23.09.2022 order, and restoring the posting of the petitioner as SI (Exe). The petitioner had made a Revision Petition before the respondent No. 2, which had not been decided.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the present petition by directing the respondent No. 2 to decide the Revision Petition of the petitioner within four weeks and communicate the decision with a reasoned order.
Issues: The delay in deciding the Revision Petition of the petitioner by the respondent No. 2.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the respondent No. 2 to decide the Revision Petition of the petitioner within a specific timeframe and communicate the decision with a reasoned order.
Final Decision: The present petition along with pending application is disposed of, with the direction to the respondent No. 2 to decide the Revision Petition of the petitioner within four weeks and communicate the decision with a reasoned order.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
Neena Bansal Krishna, J.
1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner is seeking following reliefs:
"a.) Call for the Records;
b) Issue writ of Certiorari or any other like writ, order or direction in the nature thereof quashing the Impugned 23.09.2022 passed by Respondent No. 4;
c) Restore the posting of the petitioner as SI (Exe)."
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has made the Revision Petition dated 09.03.2023 before the respondent No. 2/Director General, CISF against the Order dated 19.12.2022, however, the same has not yet been decided by the respondent No. 2.
3. Accordingly, we hereby dispose of the present petition directing the respondent No. 2/Director General, CISF to decide the Revision Petition dated 09.03.2023 of the petitioner within four weeks from today.
4. The decision, so taken, shall be communicated to the petitioner within one week thereafter with a reasoned order.
5. Accordingly, the present petition along with pending application is disposed of.
6. Needless to state that if the petitioner is still aggrieved by the decision of the respondents, he may challenge the same before the appropriate forum.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making and the communication of reasoned orders by the administrative authority.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making on representations made by petitioners.
The judgment establishes that there is no provision for filing an appeal/application against the order of revision, and the petitioner can challenge the final order by way of revision before the conc....
Timely decision on representations and communication of reasoned orders by the respondents.
The court emphasized the importance of the respondents deciding the petitioner's representation and communicating the decision with a reasoned order, in line with the petitioner's request for retenti....
The court emphasized the importance of communication from the respondents and provided the petitioner with the option to challenge the decision if aggrieved.
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.
The court emphasized the principle of mandamus and directed the respondents to decide the petitioner's representation within a specific timeline.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making by the respondents and granted relief to the petitioner by staying the movement order pending the decision on his representation.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making on the petitioner's representation and the stay of any movement order until the representation is decided.
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
