Full Text
Through: Mr.R.K.Shukla, Advocate u Nr roN oF I N D/;[r'JL*t. ..... Respondents
Through: Ms.Shilpi Kaushik, Advocate with Mr,Reynil Johans, DY.JAG, ITBP
JUSTICE PRADEEP NANDRAJOG JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
ORDER t o.08.20LL
JUDGMENT
1. With respect to the record, learned counsel for the respondent points out that on 1.1.2008 a tentative seniority list was framed and after inviting objections the same was finalized and netified on 30.6.2008, but would hasten to concede that the department used wrong language; suggestive as if on 1.1.2008 a final list was circulated and that on 30.6.2008 the same was amended.
2. Be that as it ffiay, learned counsel for the respondent would concede that representations made by the petitioner on 26.8.2009 (page 28 of the writ petition), 15.9.2009 (page 35 of the writ petition) and 7.1.2010 (page 37 of the writ petition) have yet to be decided and thus states that the writ petition may be disposed of giving time bound directions to the respondents to W.P.(c) No.56L7/20L[1]. 2011:DHC:18203-DB Y de a pass necessary orders on the representations ma petitioner and convey the same to the petitioner. by the
3. We dispose of the writ petition directing the respondents to decide all three representations made by the petitioner of which we find the last one dated 7.L.20L0 to be the most comprehensive. Decision would be taken and conveyed to the;) petitionef within 4 weeks from today.
6. No costs.
7. Dasti. --^r:lY PRADEEP NANDRAJOG, J AUGUST LO, 2oLt rs a A GAUR,