AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
Heard both of them.
Mr. R S. Parihar submits that the applicant was working as teacher with the respondents, she also got in-situ promotion and she retired on 30.06.2011 but even then the retiral benefits have not been sanctioned to her. Therefore, he submits that the respondents should be directed to consider a copy of this O.A. as representation of the applicant as per provisions of rules and decide it with a reasoned order.
Mr. Sudesh Magotra, D.A.G. submits that he has no objection, if such a direction is issued to the respondents.
On consideration of the above submissions of the counsels for both the parties, this O.A. is disposed of at admission stage, without expressing any opinion on merits of the case, directing the respondents to consider a copy of this O.A. as representation of the applicant as per provisions of relevant rules and binding instructions for sanction of retiral benefits to the applicant and decide it with a reasoned order within five weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order and within one week thereafter to communicate it to the applicant.
No costs.