Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
Hav Na Ajay Kumar Azad – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner is seeking directions to the respondents for sanctioning of the annual leave.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents appearing on advance notice has informed this Court that the petitioner applied for leave on 14.04.2023 and the said application is still pending for consideration.
3. Accordingly, we hereby dispose of the present petition directing the respondents to take a final decision on the above-said leave application filed by the petitioner within ten days.
4. In view of above, the present petition is disposed of.
Courts can direct respondents to take a final decision on pending leave applications within a specified timeframe.
The court has the authority to direct the respondents to make a decision on pending leave applications.
The court has the authority to direct respondents to take a final decision on pending leave applications.
Timely decision on leave application
The court can issue a writ of Mandamus to compel a public authority to perform a duty imposed by law.
The court mandated timely consideration of resignation requests submitted by the petitioner, ensuring the right to appeal any adverse decision.
Timely decision on representations is essential, and the court has the authority to direct the respondent to decide the representation within a specified timeframe.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making on representations for promotion.
The court directs the consideration of a petitioner's representation regarding unpaid leave salary within a stipulated timeframe.
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
