Smt. Shantamma vs Bhopal Development ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 14409 MP

                                                              1
                                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                     AT JABALPUR
                                                           BEFORE
                                           HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MANINDER S. BHATTI
                                                  ON THE 7th OF NOVEMBER, 2022

                                              WRIT PETITION No. 22536 of 2022

                                   BETWEEN:-
                                   SMT. SHANTAMMA W/O SHRI K.Y. BHUTTI,
                                   AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS, OCCUPATION: LOWER
                                   DIVISION CLERK BHOPAL DEVELOPMENT
                                   AUTHORITY DISTRICT BHOPAL (MADHYA
                                   PRADESH)

                                                                                           .....PETITIONER
                                   (BY SHRI A.K. SHRIVASTAVA, ADVOCATE )

                                   AND
                           1.      BHOPAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY,BHOPAL
                                   THROUGH ITS CHIEF ENGINEER DISTRICT
                                   BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                           2.      CHIEF    EXECUTIVE      OFFICER BHOPAL
                                   DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DIVISION NO. 6
                                   BHOPAL (MADHYA PRADESH)

                                                                                        .....RESPONDENTS
                                   (NONE FOR THE RESPONDENTS )

                                 Th is petition coming on for hearing this day, th e court passed the

                           following:
                                                               ORDER

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the grievance of the petitioner is as regards regularization of her services in the Regular Establishment while maintaining parity with the similarly situated employees.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that petitioner is willing to prefer a representation before the concerned respondent and in such an event the concerned respondent be directed to take decision on petitioner's proposed

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SAVITRI PATEL Signing time: 11/9/2022 11:45:38 AM

representation.

I n view of the aforesaid, without expressing anything on merits of the case, if the petitioner prefers a representation along with all relevant documents before the respondent No.1 within a period of 15 days from today, the respondent No.1, in turn, shall consider and decide the same within a further period of 90 days by passing a well reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law.

Petitioner shall be at liberty to place all relevant judgments/documents in support of her representation before the authorities concerned.

With the aforesaid direction, the petition stands disposed of.

(MANINDER S. BHATTI) JUDGE sp

Signature Not Verified Signed by: SAVITRI PATEL Signing time: 11/9/2022 11:45:38 AM