Rajmani v. Union of India & Anr.

Delhi High Court · 15 Jul 2025 · 2025:DHC:5690-DB
C. Hari Shankar; Ajay Digpaul
W.P.(C) 9920/2025
2025:DHC:5690-DB
administrative petition_dismissed

AI Summary

The court disposed of the writ petition with a direction to reconsider the petitioner's representation on posting with reasons for any rejection, while requiring the petitioner to report to the posting immediately.

Full Text
Translation output
W.P.(C) 9920/2025
HIGH COURT OF DELHI
W.P.(C) 9920/2025 & CM APPL. 41332/2025
RAJMANI .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Abhishek Ritabh Shukla, Ms. Chahat Raghav and Ms. Sneha Agarwal, Advs.
VERSUS
UNION OF INDIA & ANR. .....Respondents
Through: Mr. Syed Abdul Haseeb, CGSC for UOI
WITH
Mr. Devender Singh, JAG, ITBP.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE C. HARI SHANKAR
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY DIGPAUL
ORDER (ORAL)
15.07.2025 C. HARI SHANKAR, J.
JUDGMENT

1. As the representation of the petitioner for challenging of his place of posting has been rejected without reasons, Mr. Shukla, learned Counsel for the petitioner, after some hearing, seeks leave to withdraw this writ petition, with a direction to the respondents to reconsider the petitioner’s representation and in case they are rejecting it, to provide reasons therefrom.

2. The writ petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms. W.P.(C) 9920/2025

3. The respondents would pass a fresh order on the petitioner’s representation within a period of four weeks from today and communicate it to the petitioner forthwith.

4. We make it clear that the respondents should provide reasons, howsoever brief for rejecting the representation.

5. We also make it clear that we are not interdicting the transfer of the petitioner. The petitioner is required to report at his place of posting forthwith.

C. HARI SHANKAR, J.

AJAY DIGPAUL, J. JULY 15, 2025