Authorities must decide the suspended employee’s reinstatement claim by a reasoned order within eight weeks.

The applicant, appointed to a Class-IV post on compassionate grounds in 1999, was suspended in February 2014 after an FIR under the Prevention of Corruption Act was registered against him and private respondent Ghulam Nabi Dar.

The applicant claimed that a departmental enquiry found the allegations against him unsubstantiated and that officials repeatedly recommended consideration of his reinstatement, but no final decision followed.

He also relied on the reinstatement and consequential benefits granted to Dar following a High Court judgment, alleging discriminatory treatment.

Both men were subsequently convicted by the trial court; their appeals were admitted and their sentences suspended pending appeal.

The applicant sought reinstatement and consequential benefits.

1. Whether the applicant was entitled to an order directing his reinstatement and consequential benefits, including on the basis of the treatment afforded to the private respondent.

2. Whether the respondents should be directed to consider and decide the applicant’s claim for reinstatement.

The Tribunal cited no statute, precedent, or specific substantive legal test in resolving the application.

It directed the respondents to consider the applicant’s case in accordance with law, taking account of its merits and the applicant’s eligibility and entitlements, and to issue a speaking and reasoned order.

The Tribunal expressly left the merits undecided.

The Tribunal did not determine whether the applicant was entitled to reinstatement or whether the comparison with the private respondent justified equal treatment.

Instead, at the applicant’s counsel’s request, it disposed of the application by treating it, together with its annexures, as a representation for the respondents to consider.

This avoided a merits determination while requiring a reasoned decision addressing the applicant’s case and entitlements.

It directed the respondents to consider and decide the applicant’s case in accordance with law by a speaking and reasoned order within eight weeks of service of a certified copy of the order.

It expressed no opinion on the merits.