Rakhi Kumari vs The Union Of India & Ors.

PER :: NARENDRA KUMAR JOHARI, MEMBER (J) :

Shri Nilesh Sinha, learned counsel for applicant is present. Shri Bhuneshwar Pandey, ld. ASC on receipt of advance copy of O.A. has appeared for the opposite parties.

Heard learned counsel for the applicant.

At the very outset learned counsel for applicant has submitted that the applicant has given a representation on 17.06.2026 to the authority concerned for redressal of her grievance which is still pending before the authority concerned. Learned counsel for applicant further submitted that applicant is hopeful that if her representation is considered and decided by the authority concerned in accordance with the law/rules, her grievance shall be redressed. He further submitted that this OA may be disposed of with direction to the opposite parties/competent authority to consider and decided the said pending representation as per rule/law by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a specific time frame.

Learned counsel for the opposite parties raised no objection to the submission of counsel for applicant.

However, by considering the innocuous prayer of the Central Administrative Tribunal^{applicant for disposal of his representation in accordance with law} and rules, the present OA is disposed of, without entering into the merit of the case, with direction to the opposite party No.4/competent authority to consider and decide the representation of the applicant dated 17.06.2026 by passing a reasoned and speaking order within a period of sixty days from the date of production of certified copy of this order.