Back
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, Ms. Pragya Sahay Saksena, JJ
Mohd Ashraf – Appellant
Versus
UT of J&K through Commissioner/Secretary to Government, Health Department, Jammu – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. inaction on granting promotions and increments. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. opposition to the applicant's request. (Para 3) |
| 3. need for expediency in decision-making. (Para 4) |
| 4. direction for disposal and provision for personal hearing. (Para 5 , 6 , 7) |
g1arunkumar@yahoo.com, CN=ARUN KUMAR Reason: I am the author of this document O R D E R (Per:- Hon’ble Mr. Sanjeev Gupta, Judicial Member)
Mr. Monish Chopra, learned counsel for the applicant stated that owing to the inaction of respondents in not granting in-situ/time bound promotions and annual increments from the year 2012, the applicant had earlier filed O.A. No. 435 of 2021, which was disposed of vide order dated 11.03.2021 with a direction to respondents to decide the pending representation of the applicant and decide the same within a time frame. However, no action was taken in terms of the order passed by this Tribunal and now the respondents have verbally informed the applicant that his earlier representation has been rejected.
2. Learned counsel for the applicant stated that the applicant would be satisfied, at this stage, if a direction is issued to the respondents to treat a copy of this O.A. as representation of the a
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
