Direction to decide pending representation against post-superannuation recovery through a reasoned and speaking order.

The applicant, a retired Executive Engineer (Civil) from the DDA, challenged the Pension Payment Order (PPO) No. 50164 dated 17.06.2022.

The impugned order reduced the applicant's basic pay from ₹93,800 to ₹91,100, resulting in a recovery of ₹5,60,705 from his leave encashment and salary post-superannuation.

The applicant submitted a written representation against this recovery on 02.02.2026, which remained unaddressed by the respondents.

Seeking parity with similar orders passed by the Tribunal in O.A. No. 553/2026 and O.A. No. 872/2026, the applicant requested a direction for the competent authority to decide his pending representation.

1. Whether the respondents are required to consider and decide the applicant's pending representation regarding the reduction of basic pay and subsequent recovery post-retirement.

The Tribunal exercised its jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985.

Principles of Natural Justice, which necessitate that administrative grievances be addressed through reasoned and speaking orders.

The court further applied the principle of parity, following its own precedents in O.A. No. 553/2026 and O.A. No. 872/2026, where directions were issued to consider pending representations in similar circumstances.

The Tribunal observed that the applicant’s grievance pertained to a substantial recovery made after his superannuation, which he claimed was illegal.

Rather than adjudicating on the merits of the pay reduction, the Tribunal focused on the procedural lapse of the respondents in failing to respond to the applicant's representation dated 02.02.2026.

Given the respondents' counsel's consent to expedite the consideration of the representation, the Tribunal determined that the interests of justice would be served by directing a time-bound administrative review.

The Tribunal emphasized that this direction did not constitute an opinion on the merits of the case, leaving the competent authority free to decide the matter in accordance with the law.

It directed the competent authority among the respondents to consider and decide the applicant's pending representation dated 02.02.2026 by passing a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks from the receipt of the certified copy of the judgment.

The decision must be communicated to the applicant at the earliest possible date.

No order was made as to costs.