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 · 183 wordsAmbuj Nath, J
Heard the parties.
This interlocutory application has been filed on behalf of the petitioner for making necessary amendment at paragraph 1 and the prayer portion by addition of prayer No. 1 (d) in the writ petition as stated at paragraph 1 of this interlocutory application.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that at the time when the writ petition was filed, no order regarding grant of family pension was passed by the respondents but now the respondents have rejected the claim of the petitioner for grant of family pension and as such, this fact has to be brought on the record.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the interlocutory application may be treated as part of the writ petition. Prayer is allowed.
Let this interlocutory application be treated as part of the writ petition. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents seeks four weeks times to file reply to the prayer made in the interlocutory application, which is part of writ petition.
Prayer is allowed.
List this writ application after four weeks.