judgement
Subject : Writ Petition - Grievance Redressal
Writ Petition Closed, Petitioner Advised to Approach Statutory Authority for Grievance Redressal
Background:
A writ petition (W.P.(C) No.9053 of 2015) was filed in 2015, seeking to quash an order (Ext. P7) issued by the 2nd respondent and compel the 2nd respondent to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation (Exhibit P5) in a fair and impartial manner.
Legal Question:
Whether the writ petition should be retained by the court or if the petitioner should approach the statutory authority for grievance redressal.
Arguments Presented:
The petitioner argued that the Ext. P7 order was illegal and arbitrary and that the 2nd respondent had failed to consider and dispose of the petitioner's representation in a fair and impartial manner.
The 2nd respondent contended that the petitioner had not exhausted all available statutory remedies and that the writ petition was, therefore, not maintainable.
Court's Analysis and Reasoning:
The court observed that the writ petition had been pending before it since 2015 and that no interim order had been passed. The court further noted that the petitioner had not approached the statutory authority for grievance redressal.
The court held that the writ petition need not be retained and that the petitioner could approach the statutory authority in accordance with law if there was any surviving grievance.
Decision:
The court closed the writ petition, advising the petitioner to approach the statutory authority for grievance redressal.
#WritPetition #LegalGrievance #StatutoryAuthority
Limitation Under Section 468 CrPC Runs From FIR Filing Date, Not Cognizance: Supreme Court
10 Apr 2026
Higher DA Enhancement for Serving Employees Than DR for Pensioners Violates Article 14: Supreme Court
11 Apr 2026
Broad Daylight Murder of Senior Lawyer in Mirzapur
11 Apr 2026
SC Justice Amanullah: Don't Blame Judges for Pendency
11 Apr 2026
Varanasi Court Seeks Police Report on Kishwar Defamation
11 Apr 2026
Advocate Cannot Stall Execution Over Unpaid Fees or Blackmail Client: Kerala High Court Imposes ₹50K Costs
11 Apr 2026
Supreme Court Slams MP, Rajasthan Over Illegal Sand Mining
14 Apr 2026
Mere DOB Discrepancy Without Fraud or Prejudice Doesn't Warrant Teacher Termination: Allahabad HC
14 Apr 2026
Magistrate's S.156(3) CrPC Order Directing Probe Can't Be Quashed by Weighing Accused Defences: Supreme Court
14 Apr 2026
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.