S. Arumugam v. Union of India

Delhi High Court · 07 Jul 2023 · 2023:DHC:4579-DB
Sanjeev Sachdeva; Manoj Jain
W.P.(C) 8981/2023
2023:DHC:4579-DB
administrative other Procedural

AI Summary

The Delhi High Court disposed of the writ petition directing the respondents to decide the petitioner’s pending representations within eight weeks without adjudicating on the merits.

Full Text
Translation output
Neutral Citation Number 2023:DHC:4579-DB
W.P.(C) 8981/2023
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
JUDGMENT
delivered on: 07.07.2023
W.P.(C) 8981/2023
S. ARUMUGAM ..... Petitioner
versus
UNION OF INDIA AND ORS. ..... Respondents Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Petitioner: Ms. Saahila Lamba, Advocate.
For the Respondents: Mr. Vineet Dhanda, CGSC for UOI with
Mr. Vinay Yadav, Ms. Gurleen Kaur, Advocates and Mr. Hemendra for BSF.
CORAM:-
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV SACHDEVA
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN
JUDGMENT
SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J. (ORAL)

1. Petitioner seeks a direction to respondents to reckon the date of assumption of charge by the petitioner to the post of Assistant Sub - Inspector (Ministerial) with effect from 14.06.1999, i.e, the date of promotion of the petitioner to the post of Assistant Sub-Inspector (Ministerial) and further seeks grant of one increment as on 01.01.2006 and next increment as on 01.07.2006 in terms of Office Memorandum dated 19.03.2012 and other consequential benefits.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the case of the petitioner is squarely covered by a decision of a coordinate Bench of this Court dated 01.04.2019 in WP(C) 4448/2016 titled Vijayan V.V. vs. Union of India & Ors. and other connect matters.

3. Issue notice. Notice is accepted by learned counsel appearing for respondents.

4. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that without admitting any of the contentions of the petitioner and without prejudice to their rights and contentions, since petitioner has given representations dated 31.05.2020 and 27.01.2023, which are under active consideration of the competent authority, this petition be disposed of on the assurance that the representations would be decided within a period of 8 weeks from today by way of a speaking order and in case relief is admissible to the petitioner, the same shall be granted forthwith.

5. In view of the above assurance, the petition is disposed of directing the respondents to decide the above referred representations of the petitioner in accordance with law.

6. It is clarified that this Court has neither considered nor commented upon the merits of the contentions of either parties. All rights and contentions of the parties are reserved.

7. Petitioner would also be at liberty to initiate fresh proceedings in case the petitioner is aggrieved by the decision on disposal of his representation.

8. Order Dasti under the signatures of the Court Master.

SANJEEV SACHDEVA, J MANOJ JAIN, J JULY 7, 2023