Facts
The applicant, Ramesh Chand, superannuated as a Superintending Engineer (Civil) from the Delhi Development Authority (DDA)
Source reference: p. 2Following his retirement, the respondents issued a Pension Payment Order (PPO) dated September 6, 2022, which reduced his basic pay from Rs. 96,900 to Rs. 91,400
Source reference: p. 2Additionally, a sum of Rs. 2,29,243 was recovered from his gratuity
Source reference: p. 2The applicant filed a representation dated May 28, 2025, challenging these actions, which remained pending
Source reference: p. 2-3Consequently, the applicant approached the Tribunal seeking a quashing of the PPO, restoration of basic pay, refund of the recovered amount with interest, and revision of all retiral benefits
Source reference: p. 2Issues
1. Whether the respondents should be directed to consider and decide the applicant's pending representation regarding the reduction of basic pay and recovery of gratuity in a time-bound manner
Source reference: p. 3Law Applied
The Tribunal relied on the Principles of Natural Justice, which necessitate that administrative grievances be addressed through reasoned and speaking orders
Source reference: p. 3The Tribunal applied the principle of parity, citing its own previous decision in OA No. 551/2026 dated February 13, 2026, where it had similarly directed respondents to decide representations in a time-bound manner in comparable matters
Source reference: p. 3The proceedings were governed by Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985
Source reference: p. 2Reasoning
The Tribunal noted that the applicant limited his prayer during the hearing to a request for a direction to the respondents to decide his pending representation
Source reference: p. 2The respondents’ counsel expressed no objection to deciding the representation in accordance with the law within a stipulated period
Source reference: p. 3The Bench observed that maintaining consistency with its earlier order in OA No. 551/2026 was appropriate to ensure fairness
Source reference: p. 3Without delving into the merits of the downward revision of pay or the recovery of funds, the Tribunal determined that the ends of justice would be met by compelling the competent authority to pass a formal, reasoned order on the applicant's grievances
Source reference: p. 3Holding
The Tribunal disposed of the Original Application (OA) at the admission stage without expressing an opinion on the merits of the case
It directed the competent authority among the respondents to decide the applicant's pending representation dated May 28, 2025, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the judgment
Source reference: p. 3The decision must be communicated to the applicant immediately thereafter
Source reference: p. 3No orders were made as to costs
Source reference: p. 4Original Court PDF
RAMESH CHANDvsDelhi Development Authority (DDA)
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in