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 · 199 words@JUDGEMENTTAG- JUDGEMENT
Satyen Vaidya, J
Notice. Mr. Dalip K. Sharma, learned Addl. Advocate General, appears and waives service of notice on behalf of the respondents.
The petitioner has filed the instant petition with a limited prayer to direct respondent No.2 to consider and decide her representation, Annexure P-2, in a time bound manner. It is submitted that the petitioner has already completed her normal tenure in a hard area and has become now entitled for being posted at a place of her choice in terms of the “Comprehensive Guiding Principles-2013” for regulating the transfer of the State Government employees.
Petitioner has submitted her representation Annexure P-2, on 01.03.2024, but the same has not been decided by the respondents till date.
Prayer made in the petition being innocuous is not opposed.
Accordingly, the instant petition is disposed of by directing respondent No.2 to consider and decide the representation of petitioner, Annexure P-2, within three weeks from today from the production of copy of this order strictly in terms of the provisions contained in the “Comprehensive Guiding Principles-2013” for regulating the transfer of the State Government employees.
Pending applications, if any, also stand disposed of.