JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)May 15, 1996

T-214 de 1996

The official text of this ruling is in Spanish and is shown as published by the Colombian authorities.

Reporting justice Jorge Arango Mejía

✓Claimant Fernando Humanez Petro

✓
Topic · hard data
Der. De Peticion. Solicitud De Pension De Jubilacion. Cajanal. Concedida.
01

Topics and subtopics of the ruling

✓What the ruling decides and analyzes, as indexed by the Court's case-law reporter's office. Each topic links to every decision that addresses it.

Derecho De Peticion
  • Proyecto de resolución
Silencio Administrativo Negativo
  • Resolución de solicitudes
2 topics · 2 subtopics · source: case-law reporter's topic index
02

What it decided

This decision records no constitutional review holdings. This is common in tutela rulings and orders, where the decision does not concern a legal provision.
·

Operative part (Resuelve)

✓Verbatim text of the decision, as it appears in the ruling. It complements the structured holdings above.

See the operative part (6 points)
  1. PRIMERO. REVOCAR la sentencia proferida por el Juzgado
  2. Sexto. Laboral del Circuito de Santafé de Bogotá, el
  3. primero. (1) de marzo de mil novecientos noventa y seis (1996), mediante la cual se denegó la tutela impetrada por el señor Fernando Humánez Petro.
  4. SEGUNDO. CONCEDER la tutela del derecho fundamental de petición. En consecuencia, se ordena a la Caja Nacional de Previsión Social que, si todavía no lo hecho, proceda a resolver la solicitud de pensión de jubilación presentada por el señor Fernando Humánez Petro y a notificarle el acto administrativo correspondiente, dentro del improrrogable término de cuarenta y ocho (48) horas, contadas a partir de la notificación de la presente sentencia.
  5. TERCERO. COMUNICAR esta providencia al Juzgado
  6. Sexto. Laboral del Circuito de Santafé de Bogotá, para los efectos contemplados en el artículo 36 del decreto 2591 de 1991.
Verbatim text · source: operative part of the ruling
03

The bench that decided

We distinguish who appears in the ruling (signature, vote or concurrence) from who probably sat on the Court on that date. The difference is shown by color and shape.

04

How it connects

Each decision is a node in the case-law network: it cites some and is cited by others. Follow the threads.

The document’s networkthe most influential links · node size is how often the Court cites it
constitutional review unification tutela

The indexed topics and subtopics of this decision are above, in Topics and subtopics of the ruling.