IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Gaurang Kanth, JJ.
Kulwant Raj – Appellant
Versus
DG CISF – Respondent
W.P.(C) 6232 of 2023
Decided On : 11-05-2023
Exemptions - Transfer of CISF personnel - The court directed the respondent to retain the petitioner at any CISF units of North Sector only at his fourth service tenure, set aside the transfer orders, and directed the respondents to defer the posting of the petitioner for at least a year. The court also directed the respondents to pass a reasoned order on the petitioner's representation within two weeks and communicate the decision to the petitioner within three days thereafter.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought direction to retain at CISF units of North Sector, quash transfer orders, and defer posting.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondent to retain the petitioner at specific CISF units, set aside transfer orders, and deferred the posting. The court also directed the respondents to pass a reasoned order on the petitioner's representation within two weeks and communicate the decision to the petitioner within three days thereafter.
Issues: Transfer of CISF personnel, rejection of representation, relief to petitioner
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for a reasoned order on the petitioner's representation, directed specific relief to the petitioner, and allowed the petitioner to approach the appropriate forum if aggrieved.
Final Decision: The court allowed the applications, set aside the orders, and disposed of the petition and pending application with directions to the respondents.
JUDGMENT (oral)
CM APPL.24491/2023 & 24492/2023 (exemptions)
1. Allowed, subject to just exceptions.
2. The applications are disposed of.
W.P.(C) 6232/2023 & CM APPL. 24490/2023
3. Vide the present petition, petitioner prays as under:
a. To direct the respondent, DG CISF, New Delhi, to retain the petitioner at any CISF units of North Sector only at his fourth service tenure in terms of the circular dated 25.9.2017;
b. To quash and set aside the orders, qua petitioner, dated 24.3.2023, and consequential order dated 14.4.2023 wherein petitioner has been transferred from the present Unit of IGI Airport New Delhi to ONGC DAHEJ, Gujarat.
c. To quash the letter dated 6.5.2023, qua the petitioner whereby the representation was disposed with remarks `regretted';
d. To direct the respondents to defer the posting of the petitioner for atleast a period of one year.
4. Pursuant to order dated 04.05.2023, respondents were directed to decide the representation dated 30.03.2023, however, before reaching the said order to the competent authority passed by this Court, representation of the petitioner was already rejected without reasoned order dated 06.05.2023.
5. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents submits that they will pass afresh reasoned order. Accordingly, order dated 06.05.2023 is set aside and the reasoned order be passed on the representation within two weeks from today and communicate the decision thereof to the petitioner within three days thereafter.
6. Needless to say, if the petitioner feels aggrieved by the decision of the respondents on his representations, he may approach the appropriate forum.
7. Till the decision is taken on the representation, petitioner shall not be relieved.
8. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition as well as pending application stand disposed of.
The court emphasized the importance of passing a reasoned order on the petitioner's representation and providing specific relief to the petitioner.
The court emphasized the importance of a reasoned order and specified a timeframe for communicating the decision on the petitioner's representation.
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 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....
Timely decision on representations and communication of reasoned orders by the respondents.
The court emphasized the duty of authorities to decide pending representations in a timely manner, confirming jurisdiction to compel action under Article 226.
Authorities must decide representations timely and fairly, adhering to principles of administrative justice.
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.
The court emphasized the importance of the respondent deciding the petitioner's representation and communicating the decision with a reasoned order.
The court emphasized the principle of mandamus and directed the respondents to decide the petitioner's representation within a specific timeline.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.