Writ petition filed against inaction in deciding a representation for annual increment where petitioner was absent for 8 days. Court dismissed the petition finding no ground to interfere given the representation was rejected on grounds of delay and laches previously.
The writ petition was dismissed with no other relief granted.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
WPS No. 1059 of 2024
---- Petitioner
Versus
---- Respondent --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------For petitioner : Aditya Khare, For Respondent/State : Ms. Shailja Shukla Dy. Govt. Advocate.
Hon'ble Shri Justice Narendra Kumar Vyas.
Order on Board
(4-3-2024)
2
from 1-7-2006 has not been given to the petitioner. After knowledge of the above, the petitioner made representation before the respondent No.3 and vide order dated 16-6-2020 respondent No.3 has rejected the representation of the petitioner on the ground that the petitioner has filed the said representation after lapse of 13 years and against that order the petitioner preferred second representation before the respondent No.2 and vide order dated 24-1-2022 the respondent No.2 has rejected the representation on the ground of delay. Being aggrieved by the above, the petitioner preferred Writ Petition (S) No. 7364 of 2022 before this Court and vide order dated 21-11-2022 the Hon’ble Court had disposed of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to avail alternative remedy available to him under the law.
Sd/( Narendra Kumar Vyas) JUDGE
Raju
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the Court should interfere with the inaction of the respondent in deciding a pending representation for annual increment after repeated rejections on grounds of delay and laches.
Whether a writ petition challenging delayed administrative decision regarding service benefits lies when alternative remedies exist.
Kripa Shankar Dubey
State of Chhattisgarh
The Director General Of Police
The Inspector General Of Police
The Superintendent Of Police
Narendra Kumar Vyas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
