Facts
The Applicant, a retired Assistant Engineer (Civil) from the Delhi Development Authority (DDA), filed an application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985
Source reference: p. 2Following his superannuation, the respondents issued a Pension Payment Order (PPO) dated 08.07.2022, which reduced his basic pay from ₹93,800 to ₹90,300 and effected a recovery of ₹5,75,141 from his gratuity
Source reference: p. 2The applicant contended that this recovery was arbitrary and illegal
Source reference: p. 2He submitted a formal representation on 08.03.2024, which the respondents failed to decide
Source reference: p. 3The applicant sought the quashing of the PPO to the extent of recovery, restoration of his original basic pay, and a refund of the recovered amount with interest
Source reference: p. 2Issues
1. Whether the respondents’ failure to decide the applicant's representation regarding post-retirement recovery warrants a direction for a reasoned and speaking order?
Source reference: p. 3-42. Whether the applicant is entitled to similar relief as granted by the Tribunal in analogous cases (O.A. No. 553/2026 and O.A. No. 872/2026)?
Source reference: p. 3Law Applied
Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunal Act, 1985
Source reference: p. 2Principles of Natural Justice
Source reference: p. 4Principle of judicial consistency, referring to its previous directions in O.A. No. 553/2026 and O.A. No. 872/2026 to ensure uniform treatment of similar grievances
Source reference: p. 4Reasoning
The Tribunal did not adjudicate the merits of the pay reduction or the legality of the recovery
Source reference: p. 4The analysis centered on procedural fairness.
Source reference: p. 4The respondents’ counsel did not object to this course of action, agreeing that the representation could be considered according to the law
Source reference: p. 3The Tribunal reasoned that directing the competent authority to pass a "reasoned and speaking order" would satisfy the requirements of natural justice without pre-empting the administrative decision-making process
Source reference: p. 4Holding
The Tribunal disposed of the O.A. at the admission stage
It directed the competent authority among the respondents to consider and decide the applicant's representation dated 08.03.2024 by passing a reasoned and speaking order within four weeks from the receipt of the certified copy of the judgment
Source reference: p. 4The Tribunal clarified it had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case
Source reference: p. 4No order was made as to costs
Source reference: p. 5Acts & Sections Cited
1 provisions across 1 statute referred to in this judgment. Each provision opens on LawLens.
Administrative Tribunals Act, 19851
Original Court PDF
RAM NIWAS GOYALvsDELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in
