AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
5 paragraphs · 144 wordsAnoop Chitkara, J
The petitioner, who was working with the respondent-department as Assistant Librarians and retired as such on 31.03.2012, has come up before this Court seeking a direction to the respondents to decide the representation Annexure P-5.
Notice. Mr. Adarsh Sharma, learned Additional Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
In view of the nature of the order, we propose to pass, no response is required from the respondents.
Consequently, this petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondent/authorities to decide the representation of the petitioner, Annexure P-5, in accordance with law, within two months. It is made clear that in case the petitioner is still aggrieved with the outcome of the representation, she is at liberty to approach this Court again for redressal thereof. Pending application(s), if any, are closed.
