Manoj Kumar & Ors. v. Union of India & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 06 Dec 2024 · 2024:DHC:9481-DB
Navin Chawla; Shalinder Kaur
W.P.(C) 16883/2024
2024:DHC:9481-DB
administrative petition_dismissed Significant

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court directed respondents to consider belated representations against recovery of training allowance and restrained recovery pending decision, without expressing opinion on merits.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 16883/2024
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Date of Decision: 06.12.2024
W.P.(C) 16883/2024, CM APPL. 71494/2024
MANOJ KUMAR & ORS. .....Petitioners
Through: Mr. Abhay Kumar Bhargava & Ms. Khushi, Advs.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Dushyant Pratap Singh, Adv. for R-1 & 3.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN CHAWLA
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SHALINDER KAUR NAVIN CHAWLA, J. (Oral)
JUDGMENT

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioners inter alia challenging the Order dated 14.09.2024 passed by the Inspector General of Police/Principal, Central Training College, CRPF, Panihar, Gwalior, that is, the respondent no. 3 herein, directing the recovery of the alleged inadmissible training allowance granted to the petitioners.

2. In the Impugned Order dated 14.09.2024 itself, the petitioners have been granted an opportunity to make a representation against the same within fifteen days from the date of issuance of the said notice.

3. The learned counsel for the respondents, who appears on advance notice, submits that the petitioners have not submitted any representation against the Impugned Order.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioners, on the other hand submits that it was not possible for the petitioners to submit their representations within fifteen days of the issuance of the Impugned Order as they were posted at remote places and in any case, did not have the wherewithal or the legal acumen to make a representation in such a short period.

5. Keeping in view the submissions made, it is directed that the respondents shall consider the content of the present petition as the representation of the petitioners in terms of and against the said Order dated 14.09.2024 and decide the same by way of a speaking order.

6. We direct that in case the representation is decided in favour of the petitioners and if any amount has been deducted by the respondents, in that event, the deducted amount shall be refunded to the petitioners within a period of three weeks of the passing of the order on the representation.

7. In case the decision of the respondents is adverse to the interest of the petitioners, the same shall not be given effect to and no recovery shall be made from the petitioners for a period of two weeks of the communication of the said order to the petitioners.

8. The petitioners in that event shall be free to avail of their legal remedies, as may be advised, against the order passed by the respondents.

9. We make it clear that we have not expressed any opinion on the merit of the present petition, or the Impugned Order dated 14.09.2024 passed by the respondents.

10. The petition along with the pending application is disposed of in the above terms.

NAVIN CHAWLA, J SHALINDER KAUR, J DECEMBER 06, 2024/ab/sk/VS Click here to check corrigendum, if any