Rajesh Kumar Tyagi vs Managing Director, Uttarakhand Transport Corporation

Ravindra Maithani, J

Petitioner seeks intervention of the Court, so as to direct the respondent to decide the representation/appeal dated 18.09.2021 (Annexure No.3 to the writ petition), made by him to the respondent.

It is the case of the petitioner that having served the respondent Corporation for about two decades, he has not been paid his retiral dues. Petitioner had to file a petition, thereafter, he was paid certain dues. But, still certain amount has not been paid to him despite his representation.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that earlier also, petitioner filed a writ petition to get his retirement dues, thereafter, certain amount was paid to him, but still a huge sum is due with the respondent, which they have not paid despite representation/appeal. It is argued that an order was passed for recovery against the petitioner, which he had challenged by way of filing appeal dated 18.09.2021 (Annexure No.3 to the writ petition). He seeks direction only to the respondent to decide the appeal within the time framed.

On behalf of the respondent, a statement is given that the representation/appeal dated 18.09.2021 (Annexure No.3 to the writ petition) will be decided by the respondent within a period of eight weeks from today.

The Court takes on record the statement given by the learned counsel for the respondent.

The writ petition is disposed of with the directions to the respondent, to decide the representation/appeal dated 18.09.2021 (Annexure No.3 to the writ petition) within a period of eight weeks from today.