AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
O R D E R
Shri Ram Sanehi Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Chakrapani Vatsyayan, learned counsel for the respondents are present.
Learned counsel for the applicant says that the applicant is an employee of the respondents and had been getting pension. He retired on 31.06.2005 and part of his pension was commuted, and after 15 years of commutation it should have been restored to him as part of the pension, which has not been done in the year 2020. After that he has contacted the competent authority several times and he has given several applications dated 18.09.2023, 01.09.2021 and other several other applications, those are annexed in the OA from page Nos. 22 to 34. He further said that the applicant will be satisfied if a direction is given to the competent authority amongst the respondents to consider his application.
Learned counsel for the respondents has opposed the request made by the learned counsel for the applicant.
The applicant has only prayed to decide the representation; considering the innocuous prayer of the applicant, it may not be fruitful to keep this OA pending, and hence, the OA is decided at the admission stage itself, without entering into the merits of the case, and I direct the applicant to file a fresh representation within 15 days from today annexing the earlier representation alongwith the relevant documents before the competent authority amongst the respondents and the competent authority amongst the respondents is directed to consider and decide the said representation within a period of four months time from the date of receiving the fresh representation alongwith certified copy of this order. Thereafter, in two weeks the authority may make available a copy of their speaking order to the applicant. All associated MAs stand disposed of accordingly. No costs.