AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
PER HON’BLE JUSTICE ANIL KUMAR OJHA, MEMBER (J)
Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned counsel for the respondents and perused the records.
Through this Original Application, applicant has prayed for the following relief (s):
“i)This Hon’ble Tribunal may kindly be pleased to direct the respondents to convene the review DPC to the DPC held in the month of December, 2019 for promotion of the applicant to the post of Senior Tax Assistant after counting her past services rendered by her in previous region i.e. Chennai Region before her inter Charge Transfer to Lucknow towards her eligibility, keeping in view the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Pratibha Rani (Supra).
ii) To pass such other orders which are found just fit and proper under the circumstances of the case.
iii) To allow the original application with cost.”
At the outset, learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the instant O.A. may be disposed of as applicant is only seeking decision on the representation preferred by him in the light of judgments passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3792 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 31728/2018:- Pratibha Rani & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. on 10.04.2019 (Annexure No. A-9 to this OA) and Allahabad Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 361 of 2021:- Brijesh Kumar & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. on 18.04.2024 (Annexure No. A-10 to this OA) and ends of justice would be served if a direction is given by this Tribunal to the respondents/competent authority to consider and dispose of the pending representation of the applicant dated 12.01.2024 attached as Annexure No. A-11 [page 166-67 of the paper-book] to this O.A. in the light of aforecited judgments of the Allahabad Bench and Principal Bench of this Tribunal by way of reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated period of time.
To this, learned counsel for the respondents orally opposed, however, submitted that in case the applicant’s representation is directed to be decided in the manner suggested, then at least three months’ time may be allowed for the same.
In view of the above submission, respondents/ competent authority are directed to consider and decide the representation of the applicant dated 12.01.2024 attached as Annexure No. A-11 [page 66-67 of the paper-book] to this OA in the light of judgments passed by Hon’ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 3792 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 31728/2018:-Pratibha Rani & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. on 10.04.2019 (Annexure No. A-9 to this OA) and Allahabad Bench of this Tribunal in O.A. No. 361 of 2021:- Brijesh Kumar & Ors. vs. Union of India & Ors. on 18.04.2024 (Annexure No. A-10 to this OA) and pass a reasoned and speaking order as per law within a period of three months from the date of receipt of certified copy of this order, under intimation forthwith to the applicant.
It is made clear that nothing has been commented upon the merits of the case.
For avoidance of doubts, it is clarified that similarity of facts and applicability of aforecited judgments shall be determined by the competent authority itself while deciding the representation of the applicant.
The OA is disposed of accordingly.
There is no order as to costs.