Tribunals and CommissionsDivision Bench(2021) 02 CAT CK 0019

Suraj Prakash (BM ID-10021978) vs North Delhi Municipal Corporation & Others

Central Administrative Tribunal · Decided on 1 February 2021

HON’BLE JUDGES
A. K. Bishnoi, Member (A) · R.N. Singh, J
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Original Application No. 215 Of 2021

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

24 paragraphs · 411 words

R. N. Singh, Member (J)

1.

The applicant who is working as a Driver under the respondents has filed the present OA praying therein for the following reliefs:

“(a) Directing the respondents to place the relevant records pertaining to the present OA before the Hon’ble Tribunal for the proper

adjudication in the matter.

(b) Directing the respondents to consider and finalize the request for removal of discrimination while making the pay fixation of the

applicant vis-a-vis to his junior Sh. Satish Kumar for which the applicant has been approaching to the respondents time and again as per

tune of the concerned officials followed by representation dt. 15.09.20 and reminder dt. 03.11.20 also within some stipulated period as the

same is still pending consideration with all other consequential benefits namely the arrears of pay differences with interest from the date

from which the junior has been accorded.

(c) Allowing the OA with costs.

(d) Any other fit and proper relief may also be granted.â€​

2.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that one of his junior, namely, Mr Satish Kumar has been granted a correct fixation of pay after grant of

ACP/MACP whereas the applicant’s similar claim has been ignored. The applicant has preferred a representation dated 15.09.2020 followed by

another representation dated 2.11.2021 (Annexure A1) for redressal of his grievances. However, in spite of lapse of more than three months, same

has not been considered by the respondents.

3.

Issue notice. Shri M.S. Reen, learned counsel for respondents, who appears on advance service, accepts notice.

4.

At the stage, Shri U. Srivastava, learned counsel for the applicant submits that applicant will be satisfied, if the present OA is disposed of with

direction to the respondents to consider the aforesaid representation and to dispose of the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order in a time

bound manner.

5.

We are of the considered view that if such request of the applicant is accepted, no prejudice is likely to be caused to the respondents.

6.

In view of the aforesaid, without going into the merits of the claim of the applicant, the present OA is disposed of with direction to the respondent to

consider the aforesaid representation of the applicant and to dispose of the same by passing a reasoned and speaking order as expeditiously as

possible in any case within 10 weeks of receipt of copy of this Order.

7.

The OA is disposed of with aforesaid directions. No costs.