MEERA NARAYAN NAIK Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The case of the petitioner is that, she was an employee of 7th respondent and her pensionary benefits have not been fixed appropriately. Hence she gave a representation to 4th respondent. As there was no action on their part, the present writ petition is filed.

(2.) In spite of service of notice respondents No.6 and 7, who had employed the services of the petitioner, have remained unrepresented.

(3.) Learned Addl. Government Advocate, upon instructions, submits that the petitioner was an employee of respondents No.6 and 7 and they have not forwarded the necessary documents to the 4th respondent to consider the request of the petitioner. It is further submitted that, if necessary particulars are forwarded to the 4th respondent through respondents No.6 and 7, the same shall be considered in accordance with law.