JurídicoESEN
Tutela ruling (T)July 3, 1998

T-332 de 1998

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

Reporting justice Fabio Morón Díaz

✓Claimant Maria Del Carmen Uscategui

✓
Topic · hard data
Der. De Peticion. Solicitud De Pago De Cesantias. La Falta De Disponibilidad Presupuestal No Es Excusa Para Eludir Las Peticiones. Concedida Parcialmente.
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
  • Falta de disponibilidad presupuestal no excusa deber de contestar
Acción De Tutela
  • Improcedencia general para reclamar pago de acreencias laborales
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 (4 points)
  1. Primero. REVOCAR el fallo de instancia proferido por el Juzgado
  2. Segundo. Laboral del Circuito de Sogamoso y en consecuencia, TUTELAR el derecho de peticion de la senora MARIA DEL CARMEN USCATEGUI. Se ordena al Director del Hospital San Jose de Sogamoso, que si aun no lo ha hecho responda en el termino de cuarenta y ocho (48 ) horas contadas a partir de la notificacion de esta sentencia a responder afirmativa o negativamente las solicitudes que respecto de sus cesantias definitivas ha hecho la petente.
  3. Segundo. Advertir al Director del Hospital San Jose de Sogamoso que no podra negar o condicionar el reconocimiento de las cesantias definitivas a la disponibilidad presupuestal, por las razones que se consignaron en la parte motiva de esta sentencia.
  4. Tercero. LIBRENSE, por la Secretaria General de la Corte Constitucional las comunicaciones de que trata el articulo 36 del Decreto 2591 de 1991, para los efectos alli contemplados.
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.