AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
SUNIL GAUR , J.
By way of this writ petition, implementation of office order of 12th July, 2017 (Annexure P-33) is sought by petitioner. Â
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that a Representation (Annexure P-34) was made to respondent-University on 25th August, 2017, but to
no avail. It is pointed out by petitioner’s counsel that instead of implementing the office order (Annexure P-33), respondentUniversity vide
impugned order of 26/27th March, 2018 (Annexure P-35) has adjusted the study leave salary due to petitioner as well as the benefit accruing to
petitioner under the VIIth Central Pay Commission towards the impugned recovery. Â
Learned counsel for petitioner submits that Representation against impugned order (Annexure P-35) has been made, but its copy is not readily
available.
In the facts and circumstances of this case, it is deemed appropriate to dispose of this petition and the applications with permission to petitioner to
make a concise Representation to respondent-University to seek implementation of its office order (Annexure P-33) and against the adjustment of
salary etc. made vide Annexure P-35. Learned counsel for petitioner submits that a concise Representation would be made within two weeks to
respondent-University. If it is so done, then a speaking response to the said Representation be made by Respondent-University within a period of six
weeks and the fate of the said Representation be conveyed to petitioner within two weeks thereafter, so that petitioner may avail of the remedy as
available in law, if need be.
With the aforesaid directions, this petition and the applications are accordingly disposed of. Copy of this order be given dasti to counsel for the
parties.