Back
SURESH KUMAR KAIT, NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA
V Sundar Raj – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks terminal posting benefits. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. directive issued to respondents for timely decision. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. petition disposed based on directives. (Para 5) |
1. Present petition has been filed seeking directions to the respondents DG BSF to give the petitioner benefits of terminal posting to a place near his hometown.
2. For the aforesaid relief, petitioner has already made representation dated 26.06.2022 before Director General, Border Security Force for his transfer in terms of the terminal posting rules stipulated under Rule 10 of the BSF (Tenue of Posting and Deputation) Rules, 2000.
3. Accordingly, respondents are directed to decide the same within three weeks from today and the decision taken thereon shall be communicated to the petitioner in writing within one week thereafter.
4. Needless to say that if the petitioner is still aggrieved by the decision of the respondents, he may challenge the same before the appropriate forum.
5. In view of aforesaid directions, petition is disposed of.
The court upheld the authority's discretion in transfer decisions, emphasizing the need for demonstrating arbitrariness for judicial intervention in military postings.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that unless arbitrariness is shown, the court should refrain from interfering in transfer and posting orders, especially in the case of armed force....
In the interest of justice, the court directed the respondents to treat the petition as a representation and decide within a specified timeframe.
The court emphasized the importance of considering the petitioner's representation and making a reasoned decision within a specified timeframe.
Administrative decisions may be challenged on grounds of arbitrariness, ensuring employee tenure rights are protected until a fair decision on representation is made.
Administrative authorities must timely decide on service-related petitions made by their employees, ensuring adherence to procedural fairness.
The vacancy position as the primary criteria for issuing posting/transfer/attachment orders and the plenary power of the Director General BSF in this regard.
The court emphasized the duty of authorities to decide pending representations in a timely manner, confirming jurisdiction to compel action under Article 226.
The court emphasized the importance of timely decision-making and communication of reasoned orders by the respondents in response to the petitioner's representation.
The court emphasized the importance of following policy guidelines and providing reasoned decisions in matters related to the transfer of CISF personnel.
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
