Disposed

Captain Amarendra Kumar v. Union of India through Secretary, and Ors.

Bombay HC7 Sept 2018WP/2981/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner challenged transfer of posting but grievance remained regarding non-consideration of representations against his Administrative Head. Court held that Ministry of Defence, not the immediate Administrative Head, must decide to ensure natural justice and directed it to do so within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Ministry of Defence to decide the petitioner's representations within six weeks from the date of the order.

Captain Amarendra Kumar Vs Union of India through… — Service and Employment | Bombay HC (2018)

¶1

(911) wp-2981.18.doc

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

¶3

WRIT PETITION NO.2981 OF 2018

¶4

Captain Amarendra Kumar : Petitioner. Versus Union of India (Through Secretary) Ministry of Defence and ors. : Respondents.

¶5

Mr. Angsuman N Chandra Ojha for the Petitioner. Mr. Ashutosh R Gole a/w Mrs. Anjali Helekar for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3.

¶6

CORAM : R. M. SAVANT & K. K. SONAWANE, JJ. DATE : 07^th SEPTEMBER 2018

¶7

P.C.

¶8

1 The above Writ Petition as originally filed was challenging the transfer of the Petitioner vide impugned orders, however, the Petitioner has joined at his new place of posting, and therefore, the learned counsel for the Petitioner Shri Angsuman Ojha states that the said challenge has turned infructuous.

¶9

2 The grievance that remains of the Petitioner is non-consideration of the Petitioner's representations which have been made to the Respondent No.1 in the Ministry of Defence.

¶10

3 There is some dispute as to whether the representations of the Petitioner have to be dealt with by the Ministry of Defence or the Commander

¶11

1 of 3

¶12

lgc

¶13

(911) wp-2981.18.doc

¶14

In-charge, Western Naval Command. The contentions in support and against were made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

¶15

4 It seems that the Administrative Head of the Petitioner is the Western Naval Command. In the instant case, the Petitioner has a grievance against his Administrative Head i.e. the Respondent No.3. Hence directing the Administrative Head to decide the representations of the Petitioner would be a negation of the principles of natural justice. It would therefore be appropriate if the Respondent No.1 through the Ministry of Defence decides the representations of the Petitioner. Some of the representations have been annexed to the above Writ Petition i.e. the representation dated 30/11/2017, the representation dated 27/01/2018 and the representation dated 09/02/2018. In fact in the representation dated 27/01/2018 which refers to the representation dated 30/11/2017 the Petitioner has requested that his grievance be forwarded to the next superior authority i.e. Government of India in accordance with paragraph 5(c) of CNO 07/1986. We accordingly direct the concerned authority in the Ministry of Defence in the Central Government to decide the Petitioner's representations. Same to be done within six weeks from date i.e. on or before 19/10/2018. By issuing the aforesaid directions we dispose of the above Writ Petition.

¶16

5 The instant order to be communicated to the concerned

¶17

2 of 3

¶18

lgc

¶19

(911) wp-2981.18.doc

¶20

department/authority of the Central Government as well as the concerned department/authority in the Western Naval Command by the learned counsel for the Respondent Nos.1 to 3 forthwith.

¶21

6 All concerned parties to act upon an ordinary copy of the instant order duly authenticated by the Court Associate/Sheristedar.

¶22

[K. K. SONAWANE, J]

¶23

[R.M.SAVANT, J]

¶24

Laxmikant Gopal Chandan

¶25

Digitally signed by Laxmikant Gopal Chandan Date: 2018.09.07 17:55:18 +0530

¶26

3 of 3

¶27

lgc

Captain Amarendra Kumar v. Union of India through Secretary, and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Captain Amarendra Kumar v. Union of India through Secretary, and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Shrirang Laxman Shinde Vs the State of Maharashtra through Principal Secretary and Ors.

Shri. Santosh Bhika Thakare Vs the Commissioner, Malegaon Municipal Corporation and Anr.

Idea Cellular Limited and Anr. Vs Pune Municipa Corporation and Anr.

Gope Laxmichand Badlani Vs Oriental Bank of Commerce

Shri. Raghunath Mahadu Rathod Vs the State of Maharashtra through Its Revenue Dept. and Ors.

Maharashtra State Handicapped Employees'/Officers' Association,Thru.President Shri Digambar B Ghadg Vs the State of Maharashtra, Thru. the Secretary, Finance Dept. and Ors.