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. 5Original Court PDF
RAM NIWAS GOYALvsDELHI DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in