Direction to decide pending appeal against suspension and *dies non* classification via reasoned and speaking order.

The applicant, a teacher with the Municipal Corporation of Delhi (MCD), was placed under suspension from February 19, 2021, to October 18, 2021

By an order dated April 9, 2024, the respondents treated this suspension period as dies non

The applicant filed a statutory appeal against this order on August 26, 2025, followed by a legal notice on October 3, 2025

Claiming the respondents failed to decide the appeal, the applicant approached the Central Administrative Tribunal. The application was filed with a delay of 138 days from the date the cause of action arose

The applicant sought to quash the suspension, the dies non order, and requested full pay and allowances for the period

1. Whether the delay of 138 days in filing the Original Application (O.A.) should be condoned?

2. Whether the Tribunal should direct the respondents to dispose of the pending statutory appeal and legal notice through a reasoned and speaking order?

The Tribunal applied the principle of condonation of delay under the Limitation Act/Administrative Tribunals Act, emphasizing that delay may be condoned if the matter involves substantial rights of employees, such as pensionary benefits

It further relied on the administrative principle that statutory authorities are obligated to dispose of pending appeals and representations by passing "reasoned and speaking orders" within a prescribed timeframe to ensure transparency and justice

The Tribunal first addressed the delay in filing. It noted that the classification of a suspension period as dies non has a direct adverse impact on an employee's service record and future pensionary benefits

Given this potential hardship, the Tribunal held that the 138-day delay was justifiable and condoned it

Regarding the merits of the O.A., the applicant's counsel narrowed the requested relief to a simple direction for the disposal of the pending appeal dated August 26, 2025

The respondents' counsel raised no objection to this request

Consequently, the Tribunal determined that a judicial direction to the competent authority would suffice to resolve the immediate grievance without the Tribunal needing to rule on the underlying merits of the suspension at the admission stage

The O.A. was disposed of at the admission stage without an expression of opinion on its merits

The competent authority among the respondents was directed to dispose of the applicant’s appeal dated August 26, 2025, and the legal notice dated October 3, 2025, by passing a reasoned and speaking order within eight weeks of receiving the order

No order as to costs was made