Does the High Court’s writ jurisdiction empower it to direct administrative authorities to consider and dispose representations within a stipulated timeframe?

Summary

Practical Impact

What’s New / What Lawyers Should Note

• The High Court may issue time-bound directions to administrative bodies to decide pending representations.
• All legal and factual contentions remain open even after a judicial time-frame order.
• Authorities can seek additional information from the applicant but must avoid delay under the guise of further inquiry.
• Courts can impose heavy costs on authorities for non-compliance with time-bound judicial directions.

Summary of Legal Reasoning

1. The petitioner’s representation, backed by the Principal’s recommendation, had not been considered by the appropriate authority.
2. Under its writ jurisdiction, the High Court intervenes to ensure administrative action is not indefinitely stalled.
3. It directs the Director of Higher Secondary Education to decide the representation within four weeks, preserving all contentions for final decision.
4. The court permits requests for further documents but cautions against using that process to delay disposal.
5. It warns that failure or delay in compliance may attract heavy costs against the decision-making authority.
6. A web copy of the order is to be circulated for prompt compliance by all concerned.

Arguments by the Parties

Petitioner

• The Director failed to decide her representation for engagement despite a clear recommendation by the Principal.

State / Respondents

• Initially resisted judicial intervention but agreed to consider the grievance in a time-bound manner when requested by the Court.

Factual Background

The petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.33311/2024 challenging the non-consideration of her representation for engagement, which was supported by the Principal of the institution. Annexures 3 and 6 series to the petition contain the representation and the recommendation, respectively. The State authorities were directed to decide the matter within four weeks, with all contentions kept open and a warning of heavy costs for delay. A web copy of the order is to be acted upon by all concerned.

Procedural Innovations

• Directing a four-week timeline for administrative decision-making on pending representations.
• Explicitly preserving all contentions while mandating time-bound disposal.
• Authorising authorities to solicit additional documents, provided it does not become a ground for delay.

Alert Indicators

• ✔ Precedent Followed
• 📅 Time-Sensitive