Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur
Gokul Prasad vs Defence on 20 January, 2022
1 O.A.No. 200/00074/2022
Through Video Conferencing
CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH
JABALPUR
Original Application No.200/00074/2022
Jabalpur, this Thursday, the 20th day of January, 2022
HON'BLE SHRI RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
Gokul Prasad, son of Late Mahesh Prasad, aged aout
62 years, Occupation: Retired FGM (HS-I), MES, GE (East)
Jabalpur (M.P.), R/o Priyadarshini Colony, Near Higher
Secondary School Mahgawan, P.S. & Post Khamariya,
District Jabalpur (M.P.)- 482005 (Mobile No. 7697527107)
-Applicant
(By Advocate - Shri N K Agrawal)
Versus
1. Union of India, through Secretary, Ministry of Defence,
New Delhi - 110001
2. Engineer In Chief, Army Head Quarter, Kashmir House,
Rajaji Marg, New Delhi, Pin Code- 110001
3. Commander, Works Engineer (M.E.S.), Military Supply
Depot Marg, Cantt. Sadar, Jabalpur (M.P.), Pin Code-
482001
4. Garrison Engineer (East), MES Near COD, Post Gokalpur,
Jabalpur (M.P.), Pin Code - 482011
5. Barrack Store Officer (East), MEs under G.E. (East), Near
COD, Post Gokalpur, Jabalpur (M.P.), Pin Code- 482011
-Respondents
(By Advocate - Shri S P Singh)
Page 1 of 3
2 O.A.No. 200/00074/2022
O R D E R(ORAL)
Heard.
2. This O.A. has been filed against the inaction on behalf of the respondents whereby the respondent department are not granting the leave encashment to the applicant.
3. From the pleadings, the case of the applicant is that after completing successful career of 38 years of service, the applicant have been superannuated from the post of FGM (HS-I) from the office of Garrison Engineer, M.E.S. G.E. (East) Jabalpur (M.P.) on 30.06.2019. It has been submitted by the counsel for the applicant that at the time of retirement No Demand Certificate was issued in favour of the applicant on 30.06.2020. The copy of which is annexed as Annexure A/3. Thereafter, the applicant had made a representation dated 23.11.2021 (Annexure A/4) to the respondent department concerned for mitigating the grievances but till date no decision has been taken by the respondents.
4. At this stage, the counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant will be satisfied if the competent authority is directed to decide the representation (Annexure A/4) in a time bound manner.
5. The learned counsel for the respondents has no objection, if the competent authority is directed to decide the representation (Annexure A/4) of the applicant, as per law.
6. This Tribunal has considered the matter and is of the view that the natural justice will be met if the competent Page 2 of 3 3 O.A.No. 200/00074/2022 authority is directed to decide the representation (Annexure A/4) of the applicant, in a time bound manner.
7. Resultantly, competent authority is directed to decide the representation (Annexure A/4) dated 23.11.2021 within a period of two months on receiving the order of this Tribunal, as per law.
8. Needless to say that the competent authority shall pass a reasoned and speaking order as per law and all the contentions raised in the representation shall also be dealt with.
9. This Original Application is disposed of at the admission stage itself.
10. However, it is also made clear, that this Tribunal has not touched the merit of the case.
11. The applicant is directed to make available the copy of the order of this Tribunal as well as the copy of the Original Application to the competent authority.
(Ramesh Singh Thakur) Judicial Member vk/-
Page 3 of 3