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
6 paragraphs · 178 wordsSharad Kumar Gupta, J
Heard counsel for the parties.
The petitioner has preferred this writ petition to direct the respondents to consider the case of the petitioner for regularization.
Petitioner is working as Data Entry Operator and posted at Janpad Panchayat, Baloda Bazar.
Counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner may file the fresh representation before the respondents No. 2 & 3 and instant writ petition may be disposed of directing the respondents No. 2 & 3 that he may decide such representation within stipulated time.
Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner, the writ petition is disposed of with this direction that the petitioner may file fresh representation before the respondents No. 2 & 3 within ten days from today. The respondents No. 2 & 3 shall decide such representation within sixty days from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, according to the law and procedure. This Court has not touched the merits of the case.
