Competent authority must decide the representation by a reasoned order within six weeks, without prejudging its merits.

The petitioner, Kamta Sahu, approached the High Court seeking directions to the respondent authorities to take necessary action on his representation, stated to have been submitted on 23 August 2024.

During the hearing, the petitioner submitted that his grievance would be substantially addressed if the competent authority were directed to consider and decide the representation in accordance with law. The State did not object to the grant of such limited relief.

Whether the competent respondent authority should be directed to consider and decide the petitioner’s representation dated 23 August 2024 in accordance with law.

Whether the High Court should express any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s underlying claim.

The Court applied the administrative-law principle that a competent authority must consider a duly submitted representation in accordance with law and dispose of it by a reasoned and speaking order within a reasonable time.

The Court further applied the principle that, while issuing a direction for consideration of a representation, it should not adjudicate or express an opinion on the merits of the underlying claim.

Considering the limited nature of the grievance, the asserted submission of the representation dated 23 August 2024, and the State’s lack of objection, the Court found that the interests of justice would be served by directing the competent authority to examine the representation independently.

The direction was confined to consideration and disposal in accordance with law, through a reasoned and speaking order, and did not amount to an adjudication of the petitioner’s substantive claim.

The Court clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits and that the authority must consider the representation independently and strictly in accordance with law.