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
4 paragraphs · 201 wordsSandeep Sharma, J
Learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner fairly states that during the pendency of the present proceedings, order dated 20.6.2018 passed by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal in OA No. 3422 of 2016, titled Mast Ram vs. Himachal Pradesh Tourism Development Corporation Limited and others, stands complied with, save and except payment of interest on the delayed payment of DCRG/retiral benefits.
Learned Counsel appearing for the respondents, states that though he has every reason to believe that by now, order in question, stands duly complied with by the respondents, but if not, same shall be fully complied with, within a period of four weeks from today.
In view of above, this Court sees no reason to keep the present proceedings alive and accordingly, same are closed with a direction to the respondents to fully comply with the order in question, within a period of four weeks. In case respondents fail to comply with the order passed by erstwhile Himachal Pradesh Administrative Tribunal within four weeks, petitioner shall be at liberty to get the present proceedings revived, so that appropriate action is taken against the erring officials, in accordance with. Notices issued to the respondents are discharged.