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 - Kolkata

Dr Shri Prakash vs Central Councilfor Research In ... on 7 July, 2023

ee oO ENTRAL ADMINISTRATIVE TRIBUNAL
KOLKATA BENCH, KOLKATA

0.A/350/8 19/2023 Date of Order: 07.07.2023

Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Anindo Majumdar, Administrative Member

Dr. Shri Prakash, son of Sri Ram Murat Prasad, aged' about 60
years, by faith Hindu, by occupation: Service, working and
residing as educationally BAMS, MS (Ayurveda) Ph.D in
Ayurveda called Ayurveda Doctor, Assistant Director
(Ayurveda) in Charge CCRAS Registered Ayurveda Gangtok-
Dist. Darjeeling, Pin 737101under control of Central Council
for Research in. Ayurvedic (CCRAS) An Autonomous Institute
Organization under Ministry of Ayush, Govt. of India

PH 9451865403
Email [email protected].
Sub Rejoining Grp. B.

--Applicant

Versus-

4. The Union of India, service through the Secretary,
Government of India, Ministry of Ayurveda, Yoga
Naturopathy, Unani Siddha and Homeopathy (AYUSH),
Government of India, New Delhi, Ayush Bhawan, Block B,
GPO Complex, New Delhi 110023.

2. Director General, Central Council for Research in
Ayurvedic Sciences, (CCRAS) [ainistry of Avush,
Government of India, 61-65, Intuitional Area Opposite "B"
Block, Janakpuri, New Delhi 110058, represented through its
Director General of an Autonomous Organization under
Ministry of Ayush Govt. of India; :

3. Director, Central Council of Research Ayurveda Research
Institute- Gangtok, Sikkim- 02 under the Central Council for

research in Ayurvedic Science (CCRAS) Ministry of Ayush,
Govt. of India.

--Respondents

For The Applicant(s): Mr. U. Roy, counsel

For The Respondeni(s): None

ORDER(ORAL)

Per: Anindo Majumdar, Member (A)

This matter is taken up by Single Bench in view of the revised list dated 04.04.2000 issued under Sub-Section (6) of Section 5 of the Lib Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 and as no complicated question of law is involved this matter is taken up for disposal at the admission stage.

2. Heard Id. Counsel for the applicant.

3. This application has been preferred to seek the following reliefs.

"a) An order directing the respondent authorities and each one of them to extend of superannuation age of applicant from 60 years to 65 years in respect of the: applicant and/or till the Hon'ble Supreme Court delivered the judgement.
b) An order directing the respondent authorities and each one of them to the concerned competent authorites for consideration of prayer of the applicant.
c) An applicant is going to retire from service on 30.06.2023 the court may direct the authorities not to retire till the case decided by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and be allowed to do the work in the same post.
d) An order directing the respondent authorities to transmit and produce all documents and records relating to the instant case of the applicant before this Hon' ble Tribunal.
e) And pass such order/orders as your Lordships may deem fit and proper."

3. In'the instant O.A, the applicant has prayed for a direction upon the respondents to consider his representation dated 22.06.2023 seeking extension: of superannuation age to 65 years and to enhance the retirement w.e-f. 28.11.2011 upto the age of.65 years. It is seen that the applicant has preferred representation only on' 22.06.2023 and without waiting for decision from the respondents; he has rushed to this Tribunal seeking the abovementioned relief.

4, At hearing, Id. Counsel for the applicant seeks liberty to withdraw the present O.A with liberty to prefer comprehensive representation containing all relevant facts as well as judicial pronouncement on the subject matter in support of his claim and a direction be issued to consider the same in a time bound manner.

5. Accordingly, the O.A is disposed of as 'withdrawn' with liberty to the applicant : to prefer comprehensive representation to 'the competent ad respondent authority within a period of 2 weeks from the date of receipt of». Sag . a copy of this order. In the event such representation is preferred by the | applicant, the competent respondent authority shall pass appropriate orders within 4 weeks from the date of receipt of such representation.

6. It is made clear that | have not entered into.the merit of the matter and therefore all the points to be raised in the representation shall be open for consideration.

7. The present OA is accordingly disposed of. No costs. fee (Anindo Majumdar) Member (A) Ss