Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Manish Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 7970 of 2023 & CM APPL. 30652-30653 of 2023
Decided On : 31-05-2023
Writ of Certiorari - Transfer Order - The court directed the respondents to decide the petitioner's representation within four weeks, considering his medical condition, and communicate the decision with a reasoned order. The joining period of the petitioner was to be extended until the decision is made.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought to quash the transfer order and requested not to be displaced from his present place of posting for at least one year. The representation made by the petitioner had not been decided by the respondents.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondents to decide the petitioner's representation within four weeks, considering his medical condition, and communicate the decision with a reasoned order. The joining period of the petitioner was to be extended until the decision is made.
Issues: Petitioner's transfer order and representation not being decided by the respondents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for the respondents to decide the petitioner's representation within a specified time frame and to consider the petitioner's medical condition in reaching a decision.
Final Decision: The court disposed of the present petition and directed the respondents to decide the petitioner's representation within four weeks, communicate the decision with a reasoned order, and extend the joining period of the petitioner until the decision is made.
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. Vide the present petition, petitioner prays as under:
"i) Issue a Writ of Certiorari or any other writ, order or direction thereby quashing and setting aside the impugned transfer order dated 22.05.2023 vide which Petitioner has been transferred from his present place of posting of Force Headquarter Delhi to 4th Battalion SSB Mohan Ganj, Lucknow UP;
ii) Issue a Writ of Mandamus directing the respondents not to displace petitioner at least for a period of one year from his present place of posting of Force Headquarter Delhi;"
2. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submits that for the aforesaid relief(s), petitioner made representation dated 24.05.2023, however, till date, the said representation has not been decided by the respondents.
3. In view of above, we hereby direct the respondents to decide the abovementioned representation filed by the petitioner within four weeks keeping in view his medical condition and communicate the decision thereof to the petitioner within one week thereafter with reasoned order.
4. Till the decision is taken on the representation of petitioner, the respondents shall extend the joining period of petitioner.
5. With the aforesaid directions, the present petition is disposed of.
6. Pending applications also stand 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.
Copy of order be given dasti under signatures of Court Master.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making by the respondents and consideration of the petitioner's medical condition in reaching a decision.
Administrative authorities must timely decide on service-related petitions made by their employees, ensuring adherence to procedural fairness.
Sufficiency of medical documents is crucial for considering a representation for transfer for medical treatment.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the petitioner's representation and making a reasoned decision within a specified timeframe.
Administrative bodies must consider representations before making transfer decisions; courts may instruct consideration without addressing merits of the transfer.
The court emphasized the consideration of humanitarian grounds in decision-making and the need for a reasoned order within a specified timeframe.
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 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 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.
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
