SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img



IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Saurabh Banerjee, JJ.
Chaudhary Hitesh Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 14270 of 2022
Decided On : 07-10-2022




Judicial review requires exhaustion of departmental remedies before any writ can be filed in court.

Headnote:(A) Writ Petition - Maintainability - Petitioner sought reinstatement and quashing of removal order - Court observed that departmental remedies were available to the petitioner and not availed (para 3) - Court directed petitioner to file appeal within two weeks against the removal order and for the respondents to decide within statutory period (paras 4 and 5).

(B) Judicial Review - Court emphasized the necessity for administrative recourse before seeking judicial intervention (para 3).

Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought directions to reinstate himself following removal from service and contested the legitimacy of the removal order dated 24.07.2021.

Findings of Court:
The court disposed of the petition allowing the petitioner to appeal against the removal order, emphasizing procedural compliance.

Issues: Whether the petitioner should pursue available administrative remedies before filing a writ petition.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that departmental remedies must be exhausted before judicial review is sought, reinforcing the principle of administrative recourse.

Result: Petition disposed of.

Table of Content
1. petition seeks reinstatement and benefits. (Para 1)
2. petition dismissed due to unexhausted remedies. (Para 3)
3. liberty to appeal granted; decision required. (Para 4 , 5)
4. petition disposed of as per directions. (Para 6)

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. Present petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondents to reinstate the petitioner in service with all consequential benefits including arrears of pay, pay fixation, seniority, etc. and his suspension, if any, be treated as spent duty for all purposes. Further seeks quashing of the impugned order dated 24.07.2021 of removal from service.

2. Notice issued.

3. Mr.Farman Ali, learned Senior Panel Counsel appears on advance notice and submits that the present petition is not maintainable as the departmental remedies (i.e. appeal and revision) are still available to the petitioner which he has not availed.

4. Accordingly, we hereby dispose of the present petition by giving liberty to the petitioner to file appeal against the impugned order dated 24.07.2021 within two weeks from today and on receipt of the same, the respondents are directed to take the decision therein within the statutory period. The said decision shall be communicated to the petitioner in writing within one week thereafter.

5. Needless to state that if the petitioner is still aggrieved by the decision of the respondents, he may challenge the same before the appropriate forum.

6. In view of aforesaid directions, petition is disposed of.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top