Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Saurabh Banerjee, JJ.
Amit Kumar - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 14282 of 2022
Decided On : 07-10-2022
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Employment and Transfer Matters
Headnote
(B) Administrative Law - The power to make decisions regarding postings and transfers lies with the administrative authority. Courts generally refrain from interfering unless the action is arbitrary or unreasonable. (Paras 5-8)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, seeking directions for consideration regarding his diversion/extension of posting, requests to maintain status quo on his attachment with a specific company. The petitioner seeks withdrawal of the petition to represent before respondents.
Findings of Court:
Petition allowed to withdraw; liberty granted to make representation, with direction on time-bound decision from respondents. The transfer order is to remain in abeyance until further action.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner could make a representation regarding his posting and whether the court should intervene in the administrative decision.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that while administrative authorities have the discretion over postings, it must act within the boundaries of reasonableness and procedural fairness, and the petitioner has the right to a prompt response to his representation.
Result: Petition disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application disposed with directions. (Para 1 , 2 , 8) |
| 2. petitioner seeks directions for posting consideration. (Para 3) |
| 3. permission granted to withdraw petition and represent. (Para 4) |
| 4. transfer order abeyance until representation decision. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
JUDGMENT (Oral)
CM APPL.43624/2022 (exemption)
1. Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.
2. The application is accordingly disposed of.
W.P.(C) 14282/2022
3. By way of the present petition, petitioner seeks directions to the respondents to consider the petitioner for his diversion/extension of posting and further maintain status quo on his present attachment with 227 Coy ASC.
4. After some arguments, learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the present petition with liberty to make a representation to the respondents.
5. Permission is granted with the liberty to the petitioner to make representation to the respondents within one week and on receipt of the same, the respondents are directed to take the decision therein within two weeks thereafter. The said decision shall be communicated to the petitioner in writing within one week thereafter.
6. Till then, the transfer order against the petitioner shall be kept in abeyance.
7. 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.
8. In view of aforesaid directions, petition is disposed of.
