Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
MANMOHAN, NAVIN CHAWLA
Amrendra Kumar – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
JUDGMENT
Manmohan, J. (Oral)--Present writ petition has been filed challenging the order dated 21st September, 2021 rejecting the representation of the petitioners against the Office Memorandum dated 16th October, 2020 and Signal dated 30th June, 2021 whereby the post of Constable/Kahar has been merged with the post of Constable (Kitchen Services). Petitioners also seek a direction to the respondents to either continue the petitioners on the post of Constable (Kahar) or assign them to any post in para medical cadre of Border Security Force.
2. Learned Counsel for the Petitioners states that the order dated 21st September, 2021 passed by the Commandant 37 BN BSF is totally illegal inasmuch as this Court had directed the Director General, BSF to decide the previous writ petition, being WP(C) 9192/2021, as a representation. According to her, the Commandant 37 BN BSF had no authority/jursidiction whatsoever to deal and decide the said representation/previous writ petition.
3. Learned counsel for the Petitioners also states that the order dated 21st September, 2021 rejecting the writ petition/representation of the petitioners has n
The Court ruled that decisions concerning employment posts must be made by appropriate higher authorities, ensuring due process and jurisdictional compliance in administrative decisions.
The court directed that unaddressed representations be treated as formal requests requiring timely responses within a reasonable period, ensuring administrative accountability.
Judicial intervention is warranted when there is undue delay in responding to representations made by citizens, affirming the right to timely administrative action.
Administrative bodies must consider representations before making transfer decisions; courts may instruct consideration without addressing merits of the transfer.
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 ....
A government servant holding a transferable post has no vested right to remain posted at one place and is liable to be transferred from one place to another, and the court should not interfere with a....
The court's decision was based on the respondent's assurance and the direction to consider the petitioner's case for appointment if found suitable in accordance with law.
The court maintains the authority to review administrative orders and allow fresh petitions when previous orders are cancelled, emphasizing the orderly conduct of procedural fairness.
The court upheld the authority's discretion in transfer decisions, emphasizing the need for demonstrating arbitrariness for judicial intervention in military postings.
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
