Vakil Ahmad vs Union Of India & Others

Mohan Pyare, Member (A)

Shri P.K. Dubey holding brief of Shri Ravi Chandra Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Dharam Raj Pal, learned counsel for the respondents are present.

Learned counsel for the respondents submitted that this OA has been filed belatedly almost after a gap of 08 years.

Learned brief holder of the applicant’s counsel submitted that father of the applicant has died in the year 2014 and mother of the applicant also died in the year 2016. After that the applicant has submitted application for consideration of compassionate appointment many times and lastly preferred a representation dated 17.09.2022 to the authority concerned but no action has been taken on his representation till today.

Learned brief holder of the applicant’s counsel further submitted that due to Corona the applicant could not file this OA in time, therefore he has filed the delay condonation application to condone the delay in filing the OA. He requests to condone the delay in filing the OA. Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the same. Looking to the circumstances of the case, the delay in filing the OA is condoned.

Learned brief holder of the applicant’s counsel for the applicant submits that his grievance may be redressed if a direction is given to the respondents to consider and decide the pending representation dated 17.09.2022 of the applicant by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a time bound manner.

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 competent authority amongst the respondents is directed to decide the said representation dated 17.09.2022 of the applicant within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order based on relevant rules/regulations by a reasoned and speaking order. The order so passed shall be communicated to the applicant without any delay.

It is made clear that this Tribunal has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

With the above direction, the OA is disposed of. No order as to costs.