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 · 243 wordsB.K. Shrivastava, Member (J)
Shri Jagat Narain Mishra, counsel for the applicant.
Shri Chakrapani Vatsyayan counsel for the respondents.
The counsel for the applicant only seeks a direction for deciding the appeal preferred by the applicant on 22.09.2022.
With the consent of both parties matter heard finally.
It appears from the documents submitted by the applicant that the applicant has been punished by order dated 02.04.2022 (Annexure A-14). The applicant was serving upon the post of Dak Sevak, Kaushambi. Departmental proceedings were initiated and after completing the proceedings the applicant has been punished by order dated 02.04.2022. Against the aforesaid order the applicant preferred a departmental appeal (Annexure A-1) on 22.09.2022. The appeal has been sent by Registered post. Photocopy of the registry receipt also enclosed. Therefore, the applicant requested to pass an order for deciding the aforesaid appeal within a reasonable period.
After hearing both parties in view of this Court appropriate direction may be given for deciding the for deciding the aforesaid appeal within a prescribed period. Therefore, prayer is allowed. The respondents/competent authority is directed to decide the aforesaid appeal dated 22.09.2022 (Annexure A-1) within a period of six month from the date of receiving the certified copy of this order alongwith the photocopy of appeal dated 22.09.2022 (Annexure A-1), both will be submitted by the applicant himself to the Pravar Adhiksha Dakghar, Prayagraj.
The OA is disposed off with the aforesaid order. No costs.