Administrative authorities must decide pending representations against post-retirement recovery by passing reasoned and speaking orders.

The applicant, a retired Assistant Engineer (Civil) from the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), challenged the respondents' decision to reduce his basic pay from ₹85,100 to ₹81,800

This reduction resulted in a recovery of ₹4,92,743 from his gratuity following his superannuation

The applicant submitted a written representation to the respondents on February 24, 2026, contesting the legality of the recovery and the reduction of pay, but the representation remained undecided

Consequently, the applicant filed the present Original Application (O.A.) seeking the quashing of the revised Pension Payment Order (PPO), refund of the recovered amount with interest, and restoration of his original basic pay

1. Whether the respondents’ action of reducing the applicant's basic pay and effecting recovery from his gratuity post-superannuation was arbitrary and illegal

2. Whether the Tribunal should direct the respondents to dispose of the applicant's pending representation in a time-bound manner

The Tribunal exercised its jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985

It applied the principles of natural justice and the requirement for administrative authorities to pass reasoned and speaking orders

The Tribunal further relied on the principle of judicial consistency, citing its previous orders in O.A. No. 553/2026 and O.A. No. 872/2026, where it had directed the consideration of pending representations in similar circumstances

The Tribunal refrained from examining the merits of the pay reduction or the recovery at this stage

Instead, it focused on the procedural fact that the applicant's representation dated February 24, 2026, was still pending with the DDA

Noting that the applicant sought parity with previous Tribunal directions in similar cases, and that the respondents’ counsel agreed to consider the matter, the Tribunal determined that the ends of justice would be met by requiring the competent authority to formally adjudicate the applicant's grievances

This approach ensures that the administrative remedies are exhausted through a transparent, reasoned process before the court intervenes on the substantive merits

It directed the competent authority among the respondents to consider and decide the applicant's representation dated February 24, 2026, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks from the receipt of the certified copy of the judgment

The final decision must be communicated to the applicant immediately thereafter

No order as to costs was made