Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Manmohan, Navin Chawla, JJ.
Raj Kumar Yadav - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 13474 of 2021
Decided On : 29-11-2021
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Service Matters
Headnote
(B) Legal Principle - Right to promotion cannot be arbitrarily denied and must be provided as per lawful guidelines examined in prior judgments.
Facts of the case:
Petitioners, constables of the BSF, alleged deprivation of promotion due to defective colour vision and sought benefits as per a prior judgment of this Court.
Findings of Court:
Court directed that representations be decided within twelve weeks and noted adherence to prior judgment referencing that the rights of parties remain open.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to promotion and benefits despite being diagnosed with defective colour vision.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners’ representations must be evaluated within a reasonable timeframe, establishing that procedural fairness is necessary in administrative actions impacting personnel rights.
Result: Writ petition disposed of with directions.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. promotion entitlement based on prior judgment (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. notice issued to respondents for representation (Para 3) |
| 3. court directive on timely response to representations (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)
C.M.No.42482/2021
Exemption allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
Accordingly, the application stands disposed of.
W.P.(C) No.13474/2021
1. By way of the present petition, Petitioners seek promotion as well as payment of all the consequential benefits in accordance with a Division Bench judgment of this Court in R.C. Mandi Vs UOI, W.P.(C) 361/2013 dated 28th February, 2013.
2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners states that the Petitioners, who are constables with BSF have been deprived of promotion due to defective colour vision. He states the Petitioners have made several representations to DG, Force Headquarters, but have not received any response.
3. Issue notice. Mr.Gigi C George, Advocate accepts notice on behalf of the Respondents. He states that the Respondents shall dispose of the representations filed by the Petitioners within twelve weeks.
4. Keeping in view the aforesaid, this Court disposes of the present writ petition by directing the Respondents to decide the representations filed by the Petitioners within twelve weeks by way of a reasoned order in accordance with law. Needless to state, the Respondents shall take into account the judgment of this Court in R.C. Mandi Vs UOI (supra). However, this Court clarifies that it has not commented on the merit of the controversy. The rights and contentions of all the parties are left oepn.
