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 · 184 wordsL. Narasimha Reddy, J
The applicant filed O.A. No.247/2020 claiming pension and issuance of revised Pension Payment Order (PPO). A representation submitted by him was also pending. The O.A. was disposed of on 31.01.2020 at the admission stage, directing that the respondents shall consider the representation and if the claim of the applicant is found genuine, the same can be resolved in issuance of revised PPO. This contempt petition is filed alleging that the respondents did not implement the directions issued in the OA.
We heard Mr. Yogesh Sharma, learned counsel for applicant and Mr. Krishan Kant Sharma, learned counsel for respondents, through video conferencing.
The respondents filed counter affidavit stating, inter alia, that on consideration of the representation made by the applicant, a revised PPO dated 20.07.2020 was issued.
With this, the order passed in the OA stands complied with. In case, the applicant is not satisfied with the revised PPO, it shall be open to him to pursue the remedies in accordance with law.
The C.P. is accordingly closed. There shall be no order as to costs.