Kashif Fahim vs Union of India

Headnote Court Copy Facts Arguments Court observation Judicial Analysis Case Map Category Hierarchy Table of Content

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Kashif Fahim - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 11704 of 2021
Decided On : 21-10-2021

Important Points

Judicial intervention is warranted when there is undue delay in responding to representations made by citizens, affirming the right to timely administrative action.

Subject

Administrative Law - Public Employment

Headnote

(A) Recruitment Rules - Challenge to the creation of posts in Ministerial Cadre - Petition challenges the orders dated 25th February, 2011 and 05th October, 2016 and seeks redirection of posts to Executive Cadre - Central Reserve Police Force Assistant Commandant and Deputy Commandant (Ministerial) Recruitment Rules questioned.

(B) Right to representation - Delay in decision-making on representation constitutes grounds for judicial intervention. (Para 1)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenged orders creating posts of Assistant Commandant and Deputy Commandant in Ministerial cadre and sought their diversion to Executive Cadre, citing lack of response to a representation made to the Director General CRPF.

Findings of Court:
The Court directed Director General, CRPF to decide the petitioner’s representation within twelve weeks, allowing the filing of additional grounds in support. Court did not comment on the merits or rights of the parties.

Issues: The main questions pertained to the legality of the created posts and the adequacy of the response to the petitioner's representation.

Ratio Decidendi: The Court identified that the delay in addressing the petitioner’s representation warranted intervention, establishing the importance of timely decision-making on such matters.

Result: Writ Petition allowed.

Table of Content
1. challenge to recruitment rules and post creation (Para 1)
2. direction to resolve pending representation (Para 2)
3. clarification on merits not addressed (Para 3)

JUDGMENT

Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Present writ petition has been filed challenging the orders dated 25th February, 2011 and 05th October, 2016 issued by the respondents to the extent it has created posts of Assistant Commandant and Deputy Commandant, respectively, in Ministerial Cadre. Petitioner also challenges the Central Reserve Police Force Assistant Commandant (Ministerial) Group A Post Recruitment Rules, 2011 and the Central Reserve Police Force Deputy Commandant (Ministerial) and Assistant Commandant (Ministerial) Recruitment Rules, 2017. Petitioner also seeks a direction to the respondents to divert said illegally created posts in Ministerial cadre to the Executive Cadre of Central Reserve Police Force.

2. A perusal of the paper book reveals that though the petitioner no. 1 had preferred a detailed representation dated 24th May, 2020 to the Director General CRPF on the afore-noted aspect, yet the same has not been decided till date. Consequently, this Court disposes of the present Writ Petition by directing Director General, CRPF to decide the petitioner's no. 1 representation dated 24th May, 2020 by way of a reasoned order, in accordance with law, within twelve weeks. At the request of learned senior counsel for the petitioners, petitioner is given an opportunity to file additional grounds in support of the representation within two weeks with the Director General, CRPF.

3. However, this Court clarifies that it has not commented on the merits of the controversy. The rights and contentions of all the parties, including plea of latches are left open.