Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Saurabh Banerjee, JJ.
Vivek Sharma - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 12008 of 2022 & CM. Appl. 35851 of 2022
Decided On : 21-09-2022
1. Vide order dated 18.08.2022, this Court passed order as under:
"1. Present petition has been preferred seeking quashing of the posting orders dated 12.08.2022, 29.06.2022 and 03.08.2022 wherein petitioner has been posted to 111 Sub Area Binaguri as Additional Officer.
2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has made representation dated 04.08.2022 to the Military Secretary, however, signed copy of the same is not annexed with the present petition.
3. On perusal of the copy of the representation mentioned above, we find that though it is directed to Lt. Gen PGK Menon, UYSM, VSM, Mil Secy, Military Secretary Br, IHQ of MoD (Army), Room No.84, South Block, New Delhi-110011, it does not contain any signatures and is not in proper manner.
4. However, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks time to produce the original representation on the next date of hearing."
2. Today, learned counsel for petitioner has produced a copy of representation dated 04.08.2022 before this Court and has submitted that the said representation has been sent through proper channel.
3. On perusal of the aforesaid representation, we find that this is not in the form of representation rather it is a DO letter to the concerned authority.
4. Moreover, the respondents have denied receiving any such type of representation from the petitioner.
5. In view of above, we hereby dispose of the present petition by granting liberty to the petitioner to make a fresh representation to the respondents through proper channel within two weeks and on receipt of the same, further directing the respondents to decide the same within four weeks thereafter and communicate decision thereof to the petitioner in writing within one week thereafter. Pending application also stands disposed of.
6. Needless to state, if the petitioner is still aggrieved by the decision on the representation, he may approach the appropriate forum.
Administrative authorities must timely decide on service-related petitions made by their employees, ensuring adherence to procedural fairness.
Authorities must decide representations promptly as part of their duty to ensure timely justice.
Non-compliance with court directions and acknowledgment of correctness of petitioner's contentions by the respondents influenced the court's decision to direct the representation to be decided afresh....
Administrative decisions may be challenged on grounds of arbitrariness, ensuring employee tenure rights are protected until a fair decision on representation is made.
Timely decision on representations by administrative authorities is essential for ensuring administrative justice, as upheld by the court.
The court emphasized the need for expeditious redressal of grievances and directed the competent authority to decide the representation in accordance with the law.
The court emphasized the importance of the respondents deciding the petitioner's representation and communicating the decision with a reasoned order, in line with the petitioner's request for retenti....
The court established that representations regarding employment vacancies must be considered expeditiously by the competent authority, adhering to legal standards.
The legal principle established is that authorities must consider representations regarding vacancies in a timely manner, ensuring adherence to legal standards without bias in decision-making.
The legal principle established is that authorities must consider representations regarding vacancies in a timely manner, ensuring adherence to lawful procedures without bias.
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
