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 · 239 wordsMohan Pyare, Member (A)
Shri Balwant Singh, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents are present.
Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that his grievance shall be redressed if a direction is given to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation dated 30.06.2025 (Annexure–A-3) of the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a time bound manner.
Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the prayer of the applicant and submitted that the respondent No.1 and 2 are not the necessary party in the OA and the representation of the applicant will be decided by respondent No.3.
However, in view of the limited prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant, no fruitful purpose will be served in keeping this O.A. pending. Accordingly, the OA is disposed of at the admission stage itself with direction to respondent No.3 to consider and decide the pending representation dated 30.06.2025 (Annexure–A-3) of the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. The order so passed shall be communicated to the applicant without any delay. No order as to costs.
It is made clear that this Tribunal has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.
All MAs pending in this O.A. also stand disposed off.