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
8 paragraphs · 238 wordsDevendra Chaudhry, Member (A)
Heard both the learned counsel for the applicants as well as for the respondents.
This is a case where the applicants are aggrieved with inaction and negligence of the respondents in delaying their promotion with retrospective date i.e. 22.10.2014 to the post of Assistant Commissioner despite their representations dated 03.09.2017, 07.09.2017, 10.02.2021 and 08.02.2021 followed by several reminders but no response has been received yet from the respondents. At this stage, learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants would be satisfied if the respondents are directed to decide their representations dated 10.02.2021 and 08.02.2021 (page nos. 15 to 18 of the OA) by way of a reasoned and speaking order within a timeframe.
On this point, Ms. Prayagmati Gupta, learned counsel for the respondents has nothing to add.
As the representations are pending since long and considering the limited plea made by the learned counsel for the applicants, it is directed that the respondents shall decide the representations dated 10.02.2021 and 08.02.2021 by way of a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The decision shall be communicated to the applicants forthwith.
It is made clear that no order as to merits of the case have been passed.
Original Application is disposed of accordingly.
No costs.