Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Suresh Kumar Kait, Neena Bansal Krishna, JJ.
Sarbraj Singh - Appellant
Versus
Union of India - Respondent
W.P.(C) 133 of 2023
Decided On : 06-01-2023
Important Points
Subject
Administrative Law - Judicial Review
Headnote
Facts of the case:
The petitioner sought direction for the adjudication of a statutory petition regarding suspension of sentence under the BSF Act, asserting the need for timely resolution.
Findings of Court:
The court ordered the respondents to adjudicate the petitioner’s statutory petitions within the stipulated timeframe.
Issues: The key issues were the adjudication of the statutory petition and the timeline for resolution.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized the importance of timely adjudication while refraining from commenting on the merits of the underlying case.
Result: Petition disposed of.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's request for adjudication. (Para 1 , 1) |
| 2. court's directive for timely adjudication. (Para 2) |
| 3. outcome of petition disposition. (Para 3 , 4) |
JUDGMENT (Oral)
1. The petitioner in his petition has made following prayer:
a) To direct the respondents to adjudicate the post-confirmation statutory petition dated 19.12.2022 preferred under Section 117 (2) of the BSF Act, 1968 R/w Rule 167 of the BSF Rules, 1969 as well as petition dated 19.12.2022 preferred under Section 130 of the BSF Act for suspension of sentence.
2. Without commenting on the merit of the case of the respondents, we hereby dispose of the present petition directing the respondents to adjudicate the post-confirmation statutory petition dated 19.12.2022 preferred by the petitioner under Section 117 (2) of the BSF Act, 1968 R/w Rule 167 of the BSF Rules, 1969 as well as petition dated 19.12.2022 preferred under Section 130 of the BSF Act, 1968 within 6 weeks from today.
3. Needless to say that if the petitioner still aggrieved, he may challenge the same before the appropriate Court.
4. The petition is accordingly disposed of.
