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 · 239 wordsOm Prakash VII, Member (J)
Heard Shri P.S. Bharti, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Anil Kumar, learned counsel for the respondents are present.
Learned counsel appearing for the applicant states that the applicant may be permitted to move a fresh representation disclosing all the facts before the authority concerned and the authority concerned be directed to decide the said representation within a limited timeframe.
Learned counsel appearing for the respondents opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the applicant.
I have considered the rival contentions of the learned counsel for the parties. Without going into the merits of the case, it will be appropriate that this original application is disposed off at this stage itself as the applicant’s counsel himself admits that the he will move a fresh representation. Accordingly, in view of the limited prayer of the applicant to move a fresh representation, he is allowed to do so within 15 days from the date of this Order. The competent authority amongst the respondents is directed to decide the same by way of a reasoned and speaking order within a period of two months from the date they receive the fresh representation of the applicant. The order passed on the same shall be communicated to the applicant forthwith.
In view of the above directions, the OA is disposed off. No order as to costs. All associated MAs are disposed of.
