AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Anand Mathur, Member (A)
Mr. M. Anis Ul Islam, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Hakim Aman Ali, learned counsel for the respondents are present.
Learned counsel for the applicant states that the applicant was appointed in the year 2012 and his name was figuring at Sl. No.05 of the seniority list issued on 01.02.2018. Thereafter, the respondents have issued a fresh tentative seniority list on 28.01.2022 in which his name appears at Sl No.146. He had represented against the said tentative seniority list but the final list has been issued vide impugned order dated 17.03.2022 wherein his name appears at Sl. No.146. Therefore, the applicant is aggrieved that his position has been reduced from Sl. No.5 in the old seniority list dated 01.02.2018 to Sl. No.146 in the impugned final seniority list dated 17.03.2022.
He further pleads that he would be satisfied if the respondents are directed to dispose of his representation by passing a speaking order within a time frame. Meanwhile, action be stayed upon the final seniority list dated 17.03.2022.
Learned counsel for the respondents states that the final seniority has been issued taking into account all the representations that had been made against the tentative seniority list.
After hearing both the sides, we find that no fruitful purpose would be served in keeping this O.A. pending and, therefore, the respondents are hereby directed to consider the representation of the applicant dated 14.02.2022 along with the averments made in the present O.A. and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of 4 weeks from today.
A copy of the speaking order so passed be provided to the applicant forthwith.
Till such time as the speaking order is passed, the impugned seniority list dated 17.03.2022 shall not be acted upon.
We have not entered into the merits of this case.
No order as to costs.