Administrative Orders Lacking Adequate Reasoning are Liable to be Quashed for Fresh Consideration.

The applicant, a Deputy Surveyor General (Group ‘A’ Gazetted) in the Survey of India, filed an Original Application (OA) under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985

He challenged an impugned order dated 07.08.2023, which rejected his representation dated 16.05.2023.

This representation sought the convening of a Review Departmental Promotion Committee (DPC) for the panel year 2005 to consider him for promotion to the post of Director.

The applicant contended that the rejection order was "mechanical" and failed to assign adequate reasons.

1. Whether the impugned order dated 07.08.2023 passed by the respondents was a reasoned and speaking order in compliance with the principles of natural justice.

2. Whether the applicant is entitled to a fresh consideration of his representation regarding the convening of a Review DPC for the panel year 2005.

Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, specifically Section 19, which empowers the Tribunal to review administrative actions affecting service matters.

Fundamental administrative law principle that quasi-judicial or administrative authorities must pass "reasoned and speaking orders" when deciding upon the rights of employees, ensuring that representations are not dismissed in a mechanical or arbitrary manner.

The Tribunal observed that the applicant’s primary grievance was the lack of justification in the rejection of his representation dated 16.05.2023. The applicant argued that the respondents failed to give "due consideration" to his prayer for a Review DPC for the year 2005.

During the hearing, the applicant limited his prayer to seeking a direction for the respondents to pass a fresh, reasoned order within a specific timeframe.

The respondents expressed no objection to this limited prayer.

Consequently, without delving into the substantive merits of the promotion or the validity of the 2005 DPC, the Tribunal found the impugned order legally deficient due to its lack of reasoning and decided to remit the matter back for fresh administrative consideration.

It directed the respondents to re-consider the applicant's representation dated 16.05.2023 afresh and pass a "reasoned and speaking order" within eight weeks of receiving the certified copy of the judgment.

The Tribunal clarified that it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case. The OA was disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.