Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Sanjeev Sachdeva, Manoj Jain, JJ.
Asstt Comdt Durga Nandan Srivastava - Appellant
Versus
Union of India & Ors. - Respondents
W.P.(C) 16175 of 2023
Decided On : 15-12-2023
Representation - Writ Petition - The court directed the respondents to consider the writ petition as a fresh representation and decide it expeditiously, without commenting on the merits of the case.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner requested the court to direct the respondents to consider the writ petition as a fresh representation and decide it expeditiously.
Finding of the Court:
The court directed the respondents to consider the writ petition as a representation and dispose of it within eight weeks, without commenting on the merits of the case.
Issues:
Ratio Decidendi: The court has the authority to direct the respondents to consider a writ petition as a fresh representation and decide it expeditiously.
Final Decision: The petition stands disposed of with the direction to consider the writ petition as a fresh representation and decide it within eight weeks.
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral) - Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that after the year 2019, no representation has been made before the respondents. He submits that the present writ petition may be disposed of by directing the respondents to consider the present writ petition as a fresh representation and to decide the same as expeditiously as possible.
2. Accordingly, a direction is issued to the respondents to consider the present writ petition as a representation and to dispose of the same within a period of eight weeks from today. It is clarified that this Court has neither considered nor commented on the merits of the case of either party.
3. Needless to state that petitioner would be at liberty to avail of appropriate remedies in accordance with law, if aggrieved by a decision on the representation.
4. Petition stands disposed of in the above terms.
The court established that while it can direct the consideration of representations, it does not dictate the outcome of such considerations.
Court directed timely response to the petitioner's pending representation under Article 226.
The Court affirms the obligation of public authorities to respond and resolve representations made by petitioners in a timely manner.
Government authorities must decide representations promptly, ensuring procedural obligations are met without adjudicating the merits of the controversy.
Court directs consideration of patta representation within 12 weeks via mandamus.
The court has the authority to direct a respondent to decide a representation within a specified timeframe without commenting on the merit of the controversy.
The court has the authority to direct the disposal of representations on merits and in accordance with the law within a specified period.
Mandamus directs authorities to consider representations on merits within stipulated time.
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
