Remanded

Yogesh Kumar v. Union of India and Ors.

Punjab & Haryana HC4 Dec 2024CWP/3080/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this contempt proceeding at the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, Justice Aman Chaudhary held that the respondent authority failed to provide reasoned orders upon rejecting the petitioner's request to withdraw resignation. Consequently, the court remitted the matter to the authority for a fresh hearing and fresh decision in accordance with law.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the competent authority to rehear the petitioner, record reasons, and pass an order afresh.

Yogesh Kumar Vs Union of India and… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Punjab & Haryana HC (2024)

¶1

CWP-3080 - 2024

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

250 CW P -3080-2024(O&M) Date of decision: 04.12.2024

Yogesh Ku m ar

....Petitioner

Versus

Union of I n dia and others

¶9

...Respondents

¶10

CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY

¶11

Present : Mr. S.K.Choudhary, Advocate for the petitioner.

¶12

Mr. Indresh Goel, Sr. Panel C o unsel for the respondents.

¶13

¶14

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

¶15

Learned counsel submits that t he petitioner, after serving 10 years and 3 months as CT (GD), resigne d since he was suffering from Acute and T ransient Psychotic Disorder ( S 2 T24), while being placed in medical ca t egory Shape-2 on account of p o or medical condition and was undergoing treatment from Dr. Amit B h atnagar, CMO (SG) of the respondent - department, as per the diagn o sis record dated 26.04.2019 (Annexure P-2). He later sought to w ithdraw his resignation on 10.02.2023 (Annexure P-7), citing the dea t h of his father, poor financial condition a nd a small child to care for, b u t the request was rejected on 05.04.2023 (Annexure P-8). Following w hich, the Court directed the respondent s to decide his representation d a ted 25.04.2023, which did not find favour with them and is apparent fro m the order dated 11.04.2023, it

¶16

PARVEEN KUMAR 2024.12.09 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶17

CWP-3080 - 2024

¶18

¶19

did not pro p erly consider the facts or provided reasons, for which he now prays for a r econsideration. 2. Learned counsel for the respo n dents has no objection to the limited pra y er made.

¶20

In Ex.Maj. Dipinder Singh vs. Union of India¹ , wherein the petitioner, an officer in the Armed For c es, challenged his premature retirement a nd subsequent request for with d rawal of the same, which was rejected by means of a non-speaking ord e r in disregard of the relevant factors, thi s Court while berating the a u thorities for having failed to consider th e material on record, emphasize d that administrative decisions, especially t hose adversely affecting an e m ployee, must be supported by reasons to ensure transparency and pre v ent arbitrariness, as this is essential for effective judicial review and u pholding natural justice, with failure to p r ovide reasons suggesting the de c ision. 4. Needless to say, reasoned or d ers are the linchpin of justice, forming the heartbeat of every conclusion. Their absence renders it lifeless, no t only undermining natural justi c e but equating to its denial by depriving l i tigants of the rationale behind the outcome. The purpose of disclosure o f reasons, as held in S.N. Mukherjee vs. Union of India² , is to inspire c o nfidence in the judicial or quas i -judicial authorities.

¶21

Without commenting on the m erits of the case and in light of the foregoing, it would be just and equ i table to direct the competent authority t o have a relook at the matter, ta k ing into account the aforesaid

¶22

��2003 SCC O nLine P&H 807

¶23

� (1990) 4 S C C 594

¶24

PARVEEN KUMAR 2024.12.09 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

¶25

¶26

CWP-3080 - 2024

¶27

facts, by gr a nting a fair opportunity of hear i ng to the petitioner and decide afresh in accordance with law.

¶28

Disposed of accordingly.

¶29

04.12.2024 (AMAN CHAUDHARY) parveen kum a r JUDGE

¶30

Whe t her speaking/reasoned : Yes / N o Whe t her reportable : Yes / N o

¶31

PARVEEN KUMAR 2024.12.09 18:04 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/judgment.

Yogesh Kumar v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Yogesh Kumar v. Union of India and Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Naveen Vs Union of India and Other

Parminder Singh Brar Vs Union of India and Others

Usha Rani Vs Union of India and Ors.

Parmeshwari Devi Vs Union of India and Others

Yogesh Vs Union of India and Another

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Haryana and Others