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
7 paragraphs · 242 wordsMohan Pyare, Member (A)
Shri S.D. Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing for the applicant and Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel appearing for the respondents, are present and heard.
At the outset, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant will be satisfied if the O.A. is disposed of at this stage itself directing the competent authority amongst the respondents to decide the pending representation dated 05.05.2025 (Annexure No-1) moved by the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order thereon in a time bound manner.
Learned counsel for the respondents opposed the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant.
I have considered the rival submissions of learned counsel appearing for the parties and perused the entire documents record.
In view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel appearing for the applicant, no useful purpose will be served in keeping this O.A. pending, therefore, without entering into the merits of this case, the O.A. is disposed of at this stage itself with a direction to the competent authority amongst the respondents to decide the pending representation dated 05.05.2025 (Annexure No-1) by passing a reasoned and speaking order thereon, as per the prevailing rules with regard to the matter, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order communicating the same to the applicant forthwith.
All associated M.As. also stand disposed of. No order as to costs.