Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, TUSHAR RAO GEDELA
Rajeev Shrivastava – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Sanjeev Sachdeva, J. (Oral)--Petitioner is aggrieved by the rejection of his application for preponement before the Tribunal.
2. The Tribunal by the order impugned dated 06.07.2022 has noticed that the matter is already listed on 16.08.2022.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner superannuates on 31.08.2022, and in case the petition is not disposed of before 31.08.2022, petitioner would not get the benefit of his success, if he succeeds in the petition and thereafter, it will be only notional benefits that he would be entitled to.
4. The fact that Tribunal has declined to grant an early hearing on the ground that the matter is listed for hearing on 16.08.2022 indicates that the Tribunal is conscious of the urgency and had accordingly, posted the matter for hearing on 16.08.2022.
5. In these circumstances, we request the Tribunal to endeavour to dispose of the petition expeditiously preferably on 16.08.2022 or immediately thereafter prior to 31.08.2022.
6. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the pleadings are complete and they shall also not seek an unnecessary adjournment before the Tribunal.
7. The petition along with pe
Courts should direct timely hearings to prevent delays from adversely affecting the rights of petitioners and operational efficiency of organizations.
The right to a timely hearing is fundamental, especially in cases of termination, and courts should ensure expedited proceedings.
The potential illegal usurpation of office if an employee is allowed to continue in service based on an interim order that is later dismissed.
Emphasis on expeditious disposal of cases in prolonged litigation and adherence to previous court directions.
The court mandated the expeditious disposal of prolonged litigation, emphasizing compliance with prior directives on urgency and the procedural handling regarding deceased respondents.
The court underscored the importance of expedient consideration by the Tribunal in matters affecting an individual's employment status and the requirement for timely responses from the respondents.
Judicial review limits interim relief before a successful original application; emphasis placed on the need for expeditious handling of pending cases.
The court determined that procedural orders of the Tribunal seeking clarifications are not appealable and do not warrant immediate intervention by the High Court.
Modification of order of Tribunal in O.A.(EKM), direct that representation shall be considered and disposed of after granting an opportunity of hearing to petitioner before positively.
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
