Natha Ram Pathak vs Director, Prashikshan Evam Sevayojan and Others

Arun Tandon, J.—Heard Sri Pankaj Agrawal advocate on behalf of the petitioner and learned standing counsel on behalf of the respondent Nos. 1 and 3.

It is not necessary to issue notice to respondent Nos. 2 and 4 in view of the order proposed to be passed by this Court today.

The petitioner has filed present writ petition against the order of the Director, Prashikshan Evam Sevayojan, U. P., Lucknow, dated 15th July, 2004, whereby the objections filed by the petitioner in pursuance of the order of this Court dated 17.11.2003, passed in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 7830 of 2003, have been rejected only on the ground that the same has not been filed within two weeks as was directed under order of this Court dated 17.11.2003, which has been enclosed as Annexure-10 to the writ petition.

From the order passed by this Court, it is apparently clear that the direction to file the representation within two weeks was issued in view of the further direction that the representation shall be decided within three weeks from the date it is filed by the respondent. Thus, if the representation has not been filed by the petitioner within two weeks as was required under order of this Court dated 17.11.2003, the further direction for deciding the representation within three weeks, seized to be mandatory and it is open to authority concerned to decide the representation without there being any time limit for the same.

However, in the opinion of the Court, the order dated 17.11.2003, passed by this Court, cannot be read as limitation prescribing limitation for filing the representation nor it is open to Director to reject the representation on the ground that the same has not been filed beyond two weeks.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed by the Director, Prashikshan Evam Sevayojan, U. P., Lucknow, dated 15th July, 2004 is hereby set aside and the matter is remanded to the Director, Prashikshan Evam Sevayojan, U. P., Lucknow, to decide the representation afresh strictly in accordance with law at the earliest possible.

It is needless to point out that the Director shall afford opportunity of hearing to the parties concerned before taking a decision and shall pass a reasoned order.

With the above observations, writ petition stands disposed of.