AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant seeks direction to the respondents to consider his case for granting retrospective effect to his regularisation alongwith the release of arrears of his salary. Hence, the present O.A.
Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that the applicant will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the respondents to treat this O.A. as representation of the applicant and take a decision on the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated time frame.
We have heard Mr. Ashwani Sharma, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sudesh Magotra, learned DAG for the respondents and perused the records.
Looking to the limited prayer made by the learned counsel for the applicant, we dispose of the O.A. with direction to the respondents to treat this O.A. as representation of the applicant and dispose of the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. While considering the applicant’s case, the respondents should also examine as to whether his claim being articulated now has become stale or dead due to inordinate delay and laches as per the view taken in Supreme Court decisions such as Chairman, UP Jal Nigam & Anr. V. Jawant Singh & Anr., JT 2006(10) SC 500 and Govt. of West Bengal vs. Tarun K. Roy & Ors. (2004)1 SCC 347. However, it is to be noted that we have neither expressed any opinion on merits of the applicant’s case nor examined applicability of the case laws relied upon by them. A copy of the Speaking Order be given to the applicant.
It is made clear that we have not entered into the merits of the case.
No order as to costs.