AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
L. Narasimha Reddy, J
The applicants were engaged as casual labourers and were conferred temporary status by the respondents herein. All of them retired from service on attaining the age of superannuation. They made representation to the respondents with a prayer to grant them the retirement benefits, including pension. Reliance was placed upon the judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in Union of India & another v. Kuntesh (W.P. (C) No.10013/2019) decided on 18.09.2019, and observations made by this Tribunal in certain cases. They have also filed an M.A. with a prayer to dispose of the O.A. in terms of the said order.
We heard Mr. U Srivastava, learned counsel for applicants and Ms. Leelawati Suman, learned counsel for respondent Nos. 1 & 2, through video conferencing.
It is not in dispute that the applicants retired as casual labourers. They are said to have been conferred temporary status. The question as to whether they are entitled to be extended the pension or other retirement benefits, needs to be considered by the respondents. Much would depend upon the relevant rules. As the things stand now, we do not intend to make any pronouncement in this behalf. The representation submitted by the applicants cannot be kept pending indefinitely.
We, therefore, dispose of this O.A. directing the respondents to pass orders on the representation of the applicants within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.
M.A. No.1249/2020 stands disposed of. There shall be no order as to costs.