AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Shivaji Pandey, J
Heard learned counsel for the parties through video conferencing.
In this case, the petitioner has basically claimed his retiral benefit and, ancillary, he has claimed his promotion and the ACP.
In paragraph nos.17, 18 and 19 of the counter affidavit, the BREADA has shown that the payment with respect to retiral dues has been paid to the petitioner which the counsel for the petitioner accepts and submits that there is no grievance with regard to retiral benefit but, he has confined his prayer that his case for promotion and ACP has not been decided till date and has drawn attention of this Court towards paragraph no.20 of the same from where it appears that a letter contained in no. 1519 dated 9.9.2019 has been issued by the Director, BREDA to the Joint Secretary, Energy Department for taking a decision in this regard with consultation of the Finance Department but, till date, as has been informed, no decision has been taken.
In that view of the matter, this Court directs the petitioner to file a detailed representation to the respondent nos. 2 & 3 and it is expected from both the respondents that they will examine the case of the petitioner and take a decision in accordance with law within a period of three months from the date of filing of the representation along with a copy of this order.
While passing the order, it must be must be speaking so that the petitioner will be able to understand the reason for passing the order.
With the aforementioned observation and direction, this writ application is disposed of.