Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Sudhir Kumar Jain, JJ.
Shiv Kumar Singh - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 5126 of 2022
Decided On : 29-03-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. exemptions granted for filing documents. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner’s transfer order is quashed by mutual consent. (Para 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 3. notice has been issued. (Para 4) |
| 4. order disposal and communication directed. (Para 7 , 8) |
CM APPL. 15263-15264/2022 (exemptions)
1. The applications are allowed, with a direction to the applicant to file true and dim copies of annexures within four weeks.
2. The applications are accordingly disposed of.
W.P.(C) 5126/2022 & CM APPL. 15262/2022
3. By way of present petition under Article 226 read with Article 227 of the Constitution of India seeking quashing of orders dated 07.01.2021, 08.02.2022, 16.03.2022 and movement order dated 16.03.2022 passed by the respondents wherein petitioner was transferred from the 55BN Delhi to 210 BN COBRA Unit.
4. Notice issued.
5. Learned Standing Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents accepts notice and on instructions submits that respondents are ready to keep the movement order dated 16.03.2022 in abeyance till February, 2023 qua the petitioner herein.
6. In view of the statement made by learned Standing Counsel for the respondents, learned counsel for the petitioner does not press the other reliefs sought in the present petition and the petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondents that an order shall be passed to this effect by today itself and the same shall be communicated to learned counsel for the petitioner.
7. In view of above, petition as well as pending application also stand disposed of.
8. Copy of this order be given dasti under signatures of the Court Master.
Judicial intervention in administrative transfers is warranted if such actions are legally challenged, allowing for review under Articles 226 and 227.
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 emphasized the duty of authorities to decide pending representations in a timely manner, confirming jurisdiction to compel action under Article 226.
Administrative authorities retain discretion over postings; courts may intervene only in cases of arbitrariness or unreasonable actions.
Authorities must decide representations timely and fairly, adhering to principles of administrative justice.
The court emphasized the importance of communication from the respondents and provided the petitioner with the option to challenge the decision if aggrieved.
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
