Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Mukul Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Anr. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 6680 of 2023 & CM APPLs. 26146 of 2023, 26147 of 2023
Decided On : 18-05-2023
petitioner - seeking reliefs - The court directed the respondents to treat the petition as a representation of the petitioner and to be decided by the Board of Officers within six weeks with a reasoned order, which shall be final and binding on the petitioner.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought various reliefs related to modifying results, examining question correctness, providing details of selected candidates, and re-examining the petitioner's case for vacancies.
Finding of the Court:
The court disposed of the petition by directing the respondents to treat it as a representation of the petitioner and to be decided by the Board of Officers within six weeks with a reasoned order, which shall be final and binding on the petitioner.
Issues: Reliefs sought by the petitioner, decision on the petition, finality of the Board of Officers' report.
Ratio Decidendi: The court directed the respondents to treat the petition as a representation of the petitioner and to be decided by the Board of Officers within six weeks with a reasoned order, which shall be final and binding on the petitioner.
Final Decision: The present petition along with pending applications is disposed of.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. Vide the present petition, the petitioner is seeking following reliefs:
"a.) directing the respondents to modify the result dated 12.04.2023 and that of the petitioner as informed on 04.05.2023;
b.) directing the respondents to get the correctness of the question examined from independent subject expert;
c.) directing the respondents to give the details of the last selected candidates in EWS category;
d.) directing the respondents to re-examine the case of the petitioners for the vacancies for post of HC(RO) if remains unfilled after any of the selected candidate does not join."
2. After hearing learned counsel for the parties in brief, we hereby dispose of the present petition directing the respondents to treat the present petition as a representation of the petitioner, and the same shall be decided by the Board of Officers within six weeks from today with a reasoned order.
3. The decision, so taken, shall be communicated to the petitioner within one week thereafter.
4. As agreed by the counsel for the petitioner, on instructions, the report of the Board of Officers shall be final and binding on the petitioner.
5. Accordingly, the present petition along with pending applications is disposed of.
The decision of the Board of Officers shall be final and binding on the petitioner.
The decision of independent subject experts is final and binding on the petitioner.
Timely adjudication of representation seeking refixation of seniority.
The court emphasized the obligation to consider the petitioner's representation for promotion and communicate the decision within a specified timeframe.
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 directs that a fresh representation must be made by the petitioner for promotion, ensuring a timely response from the competent authority.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making on representations for promotion.
The principle of estoppel and the application of Order 2 Rule 2 of the Civil Procedure Code in employment contract cases.
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
