Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Amrendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. challenge to merger of constable posts. (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. contention against merger of posts. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court's directive on representation handling. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. conclusion and order of the court. (Para 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--The hearing has been done by way of video conferencing.
2. Present writ petition has been filed challenging the Office Memorandum dated 16th October, 2020 and Sign al dated 30th Ju ne, 2021 whereby the post of Constable/Kahar has been merged with the post of Constable (Kitchen Services). Petitioners also seek direction to the Respondents to either continue the petitioners on the post of Constable (Kahar) or assign them on any post in para medical cadre of Border Security Force[BSF].
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners states that the Petitioners applied for the post of Constable (Kahar) which was announced vide advertisement issued by the DG,BSF. She states that the Petitioners were appointed to the post of Constable(Kahar) and started performing their duties as provided in the Medical Manual issued by Medical Directorate, BSF, which were essentially to look after the patients admitted in the wards, OPD etc
The court directed that unaddressed representations be treated as formal requests requiring timely responses within a reasonable period, ensuring administrative accountability.
The Court ruled that decisions concerning employment posts must be made by appropriate higher authorities, ensuring due process and jurisdictional compliance in administrative decisions.
Division Bench, on appeal, came to the conclusionthat statutory provisions limit the transfer liability of the Constable and Head Constable within the district and the Assistant Sub Inspector within ....
The court emphasized that timely decisions must be rendered by authorities on service promotions to uphold an employee's rights and service conditions.
Promotion orders in employment must adhere to proper procedures, and affected parties have the right to contest decisions that adversely impact their employment status.
Judicial intervention is warranted when there is undue delay in responding to representations made by citizens, affirming the right to timely administrative action.
Deputationists do not have an inherent right to absorption unless supported by statutory rules; abolition of posts negates claims for absorption.
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
