Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 0]

Central Administrative Tribunal - Jabalpur

Ishrambha Badge vs M/O Communications on 21 November, 2019

                               1                  MA 203/00416/2019
                                              (in OA 203/00131/2015)


CENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL, JABALPUR BENCH
           CIRCUIT SITTING : BILASPUR

    Miscellaneous Application No.203/00416/2019
                  (in OA No.203/00131/2015)

 Bilaspur, this Thursday, the 21st day of November, 2019

HON'BLE MR. RAMESH SINGH THAKUR, JUDICIAL MEMBER
 HON'BLE MR. B V SUDHAKAR, ADMINISTRATIVE MEMBER

Ishrambha Badge, Wd/o Late J.R. Badge, aged about 34 years,
C/o Ashish Kumar Meshram, House No.1345/2, Near Ram
Darbar Gate, Kota, Raipur, District Raipur (C.G) -Applicant

(By Advocate - Shri Kunal Das)
                                   Versus

1. Union of India through Secretary, Ministry of
Communication, Department of Post, Dak Bhawan, New Delhi
- 110001.

2. Senior Post Master, Main Post Office Raipur, District Raipur
(C.G.).

3. Public Communication Inspector, Main Post Office, Raipur,
District Raipur (C.G.)

4. Shefali Badge, D/o Smt. Aashalata Badge, aged about 24
years, R/o LIG-4 Agwas Colony, Baghamuda, Pendra Road,
Gourela, District Bilaspur (C.G)             -Respondents

(By Advocate - Shri Vivek Verma)




                                                         Page 1 of 2
                                  2                MA 203/00416/2019
                                              (in OA 203/00131/2015)

                       O R D E R (O R A L)

By Ramesh Singh Thakur, JM.

This M.A. has been filed by the applicant for non execution of order dated 10.11.2017 passed by this Tribunal in O.A. No.203/416/2019 by the respondents.

2. Learned counsel for the respondents submits in their reply that vide letter dated 15.11.2019 (Annexure R/1) the respondents have stated that the applicant is competent for appointment and his case has been recommended for consideration before the next CRC meeting due for compassionate appointment.

3. We have perused Annexure R/1, we find that the order of this Tribunal has been fully complied with and nothing remains in this application.

4. Accordingly, M.A. is disposed of as the order of this Tribunal has been fully complied with. However, the competent authority shall inform the applicant regarding the final outcome of the CRC meeting.

(B V Sudhakar) (Ramesh Singh Thakur) Administrative Member Judicial Member kc Page 2 of 2