Competent authority must decide a fresh representation by a reasoned order within 45 days.

The applicant, Asha Devi, approached the Central Administrative Tribunal against the Union of India and railway authorities.

The respondents had filed their written statement on 10 September 2026 and stated therein that the applicant’s representation would be disposed of in accordance with the rules if so directed by the Tribunal.

The applicant did not seek to file a rejoinder but submitted that her earlier representation dated 7 June 2024 had remained undecided and had become stale.

She therefore sought liberty to submit a fresh representation and requested directions for its disposal by a reasoned and speaking order within a stipulated period.

The respondents had no objection to disposal of the Original Application on those terms.

Whether the applicant should be permitted to submit a fresh representation concerning her grievance when her earlier representation remained undecided.

Whether the competent respondent authority should be directed to consider and decide the fresh representation by a reasoned and speaking order within a prescribed period.

Whether the Original Application and the connected Miscellaneous Application should be disposed of in view of the respondents’ undertaking and the agreed course of action.

The Tribunal applied the principles of administrative fairness and reasoned decision-making, requiring a competent authority to consider a representation in accordance with law, applicable rules, and prescribed procedure, and to communicate its decision through a reasoned and speaking order.

Since the matter was disposed of at the stage of consideration of the representation, the Tribunal expressly refrained from adjudicating the merits and left all issues open for determination by the respondents.

No specific statutory provision or judicial precedent was cited or applied in the order.

The Tribunal noted the respondents’ undertaking that the applicant’s representation would be considered and disposed of according to the rules.

As the earlier representation dated 7 June 2024 had remained undecided and had become stale, the Tribunal accepted the applicant’s request to submit a fresh representation.

In light of the respondents’ consent and undertaking, it directed the competent authority to consider the fresh representation and issue a reasoned and speaking order, thereby ensuring procedural fairness without expressing any view on the substantive merits of the applicant’s claim.

The competent respondent authority was directed to consider and decide it by a reasoned and speaking order, strictly in accordance with law, within 45 days from its receipt.

The Tribunal clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits and that all issues remained open for consideration by the respondents.

The connected M.A. No. 051/00503/2026 seeking deletion of a respondent was also disposed of as having become unnecessary following disposal of the Original Application.

There was no order as to costs.