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.
Rakesh Chopra - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 14621 of 2022 & CM APP.- 44813-44815 of 2022
Decided On : 17-10-2022




Timely decision on representations by administrative authorities is essential for ensuring administrative justice, as upheld by the court.

Headnote:(A) General principles of administrative law - The petitioner seeks setting aside of an impugned order and directions for considering representations for deputation and appointment to specific posts - Representations dated 15.02.2022 and 26.08.2022 were not decided within a reasonable timeframe. (Paras 1-3)

(B) Right to a timely decision - The court recognized the importance of timely decisions on representations made under applicable rules and laws. (Para 3)

Facts of the case:
The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction to consider his pending representations for deputation and appointment, challenging the inaction of the respondents.

Findings of Court:
The court directed the respondents to decide the representations within four weeks and communicate the decision within one week thereafter.

Issues: The primary issue was whether the respondents had a duty to decide the pending representations in a timely manner.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that maintaining timely consideration of representations is a necessary aspect of administrative justice, requiring the authorities to act upon requests in accordance with applicable laws and guidelines.

Result: Petition disposed of.

Table of Content
1. petitioner seeks multiple reliefs and directives (Para 1 , 1)
2. pending representations require consideration (Para 2)
3. court directs timely decision on representations (Para 3)
4. petition disposed of with pending applications (Para 4)

JUDGMENT (Oral)

1. By way of the present petition, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

    a) Setting aside/Quashing the Impugned order dt. 10.02.2022 passed by the HQ DGBR and;

    b) direct Respondents no. 1 to 5 to consider representations dt. 15.02.2022 and 26.08.2022 of the Petitioner in accordance with "OM dt. 31.07.2012, SOP dt. 20.04.2021, OM dt. 14,07,1993, OM dt. 15.02.2010 and consequently allow application for deputation of the Petitioner to NHIDCL and relieve him by granting all necessary approvals and permissions to join on deputation as per relevant rules and laws; and

    c) Direct Respondent No, 6 to consider the appointment of Petitioner for the post of Exec. Director in terms of letter dt. 5,07.2022 against `the latest Advt. dt. 01.09.2022 falling vacant due to non-joining of the Petitioner;

    d) Direct Respondents No. 1 to 5 to consider all future applications of Petitioner for deputation In accordance with the applicable OMs, guidelines/SOP in accordance with law;

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the representations dated 15.02.2022 & 26.08.2022 by the petitioner are yet to be decided by the respondents till date and are still pending.

3. Accordingly, we hereby dispose of the present petition by directing the respondents to decide the said representations in accordance with law in force, within four weeks from today and communicate the decision thereof to the petitioner in writing within one week thereafter.

4. Accordingly, the present petition is disposed of alongwith the pending applications.

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