The court established that while it can direct the consideration of representations, it does not dictate the outcome of such considerations.

Headnote:
[Writ Petition] - [Expeditious Consideration of Representation] - The court directed the competent authority to consider the petitioner's representation expeditiously, emphasizing that this direction is for timely redressal and does not imply a predetermined outcome.
Fact of the Case:

The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking a direction for the expeditious consideration of his representation, referencing a similar case that had been decided previously.
Finding of the Court:

The court acknowledged the similarity of the current case to a prior judgment and agreed to direct the competent authority to consider the petitioner's representation within a specified timeframe.
Issues: Whether the court should direct the competent authority to consider the petitioner's representation in a timely manner.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the need for expeditious redressal of grievances, while clarifying that the outcome of the representation should not be influenced by the court's directive.
Result: The writ petition was disposed of with a direction for the timely consideration of the representation, without any implication on the merits of the case.

JUDGMENT

Dinesh Mehta, J. - Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the controversy involved in the present writ petition is identical to the controversy decided by this Court in the case of Jagdish Bhanoda Vs. State of Rajasthan & Ors. (judgment dated 29.07.2009), which has attained finality till the Supreme Court.

2. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner would be satisfied if a direction is issued to the respondents to consider his representation (which he would be filing within two weeks) expeditiously.

3. The present writ petition is, therefore, disposed of with a direction to the petitioner to file a representation along with certified copy of the order instant and photocopies of the judgments which they wish to rely upon.

4. On receipt of the representation, competent authority shall consider the same in accordance with law as early as possible, preferably within a period of 12 weeks of the date of receiving the representation.

5. It is made clear that aforesaid direction to decide the representation has been issued only with a view to ensure expeditious redressal of petitioner’s grievance. The same may not be construed to be an order to decide the representation in a particular manner.

6. The stay application also stands disposed of accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document