AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
This writ petition assails the office order dated 8 February 2024, whereby a penalty of ₹ 5000/- has been imposed on the petitioners consequent to certain findings having arrived against them.
Mr. Saha, learned Counsel for the respondent points out that the petitioners have preferred an appeal before the appellate authority, which is the Vice Chancellor of the JNU on 19 February 2024 and that, therefore, this writ petition is pre-mature.
The only submission of Ms. Prakriti Rastogi, learned Counsel for the petitioners, is that the petitioners desire to participate in the student elections and that, therefore, they have instituted the present petition.
In my view, the reasons cited cannot be treated as so emergent and urgent as would justify this Court entertaining the present writ petition, even while the appeal is pending before the learned appellate authority.
Mr. Saha submits, on instructions, that the appellate authority would positively take a decision on the petitioners’ appeal within two weeks from today.
This writ petition is accordingly disposed of with a direction to the respondent to ensure that the petitioners’ appeal is finally disposed of by the appellate authority within two weeks from today and no more.
Should the petitioners remain aggrieved by any decision taken by the appellate authority, they are at liberty to take their remedies thereagainst in accordance with law.
Should the appellate authority fail to take a decision within two weeks and communicate it to the petitioners forthwith, the petitioners would be permitted to revitalise this writ petition by moving an appropriate application without having to come afresh.