Back
2023 Supreme(Del) 5566
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, Manoj Jain, JJ.
P Pavan Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Central Industrial Security Force - Respondent
W.P.(C) 14696 of 2023 & CM APPL. 58502 of 2023
Decided On : 09-11-2023
Important Points
The principle of expeditious disposal of appeals in accordance with the law.
Subject
Civil Law - Appeals and Review
Headnote
Expeditious Disposal - Statutory Appeal - The court directed the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's Statutory Appeal expeditiously in accordance with the law.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner had filed a Revision Petition and a Statutory Appeal, both of which were pending consideration.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondents to dispose of the petitioner's Statutory Appeal expeditiously in accordance with the law and allowed the petitioner to avail further remedies if aggrieved by any future orders.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the need for expeditious disposal of the petitioner's Statutory Appeal and allowed the petitioner to seek further remedies if necessary.
Final Decision: The petition was disposed of with directions to the respondents to expedite the disposal of the petitioner's Statutory Appeal.
Mr. Romil Pathak, Mr. Amit Kumar and Mr. Aryan Pathak, Advocates, for the Petitioner.
Mr. Gagan Kumar, SPC with Ms. Seema Singh, GP and Mr. Nishtha, Advocate, for the Respondents.
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral) - Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has filed a Revision Petition as well as a Statutory Appeal which have not been disposed of and petitioner would be satisfied at this juncture in case the appeal of the petitioner is disposed of expeditiously.
2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that Statutory Appeal of the petitioner is pending consideration and shall be disposed of in accordance with law.
3. The petition is accordingly disposed of directing the respondents to dispose of the Statutory Appeal of the petitioner as expeditiously as possible in accordance with law.
4. Needless to state, in case petitioner is aggrieved by any further order passed by the respondents he would be entitled to avail of such remedies as may be available in law.
