Mohd Jamlu vs UT Of J&K & Ors.

(Per:- Pragya Sahay Saksena, Administrative Member)

Mr. Tahir M Khan, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant was engaged as contingent/part time sanitation worker at sub-centre Dudu Seri Block Basantgarh vide order dated 06.06.2008 on a consolidated salary of Rs. 100/- per month. The grievance of the applicant is that despite rendering service for more than 18 years, the respondents are not considering his case for regularization as Class-IV employee. Learned counsel further submitted that for redressal of his grievance, the applicant had also filed representations before the respondents, however, no decision has been taken on the same uptil now.

Learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the applicant would be satisfied, at this stage, if this O.A. is disposed of with direction to respondents to treat a copy of this O.A. as representation of the applicant and decide the same within a time frame.

Mr. Sudesh Magotra, learned A.A.G. appearing on behalf of the respondents, on advance notice prays for sometime to file reply.

Having heard the learned counsels for the parties, we are of the considered view that no useful purpose would be served in keeping this O.A. pending and same can be disposed of with directions to respondents.

Accordingly, this O.A. is disposed of, at the admission stage itself, without entering into the merits of the case, with a direction to respondents to treat a copy of this O.A. as representation of the applicant and decide 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. A copy of the speaking order shall also be communicated to the applicant.

There shall be no orders so as to costs.