Facts
The applicant, Vijay Kumar, was originally a member of the Himachal Pradesh Police before being permanently absorbed into the National Investigation Agency (NIA) on February 9, 2017
Source reference: p. 2, para. 2He approached the Tribunal seeking a direction to the respondents to count his past service in the Himachal Pradesh Police (from February 10, 2014, to February 9, 2017) for the purposes of promotion to the grades of Inspector and Deputy Superintendent of Police (DSP) in the NIA
Source reference: p. 2The applicant had previously filed representations regarding this service credit on August 23, 2023, and December 30, 2025, which remained pending with the authorities
Source reference: p. 2-3, para. 3Issues
1. Whether the respondents should be directed to consider the applicant's past service for promotion purposes and decide his pending representations within a specific timeframe
Source reference: p. 3, para. 3-5Law Applied
The court primarily exercised its jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985
Source reference: p. 2, para. 2It applied the principle of natural justice, which necessitates that administrative authorities consider and decide representations made by employees regarding their service conditions through reasoned and speaking orders
Source reference: p. 3, para. 5Reasoning
The Tribunal did not adjudicate upon the substantive merits of the applicant’s claim regarding the counting of past service. Instead, it focused on the procedural lapse of the respondents in not deciding the applicant’s existing representations dated August 23, 2023, and December 30, 2025
Source reference: p. 3, para. 5Noticing that the applicant limited his prayer to the disposal of these representations and that the respondents’ counsel agreed to consider them in accordance with the law, the Tribunal found it appropriate to dispose of the matter at the admission stage
Source reference: p. 3, para. 4-7The court reasoned that a time-bound direction to the competent authority to pass a "reasoned and speaking order" would satisfy the requirements of justice without the court pre-judging the merits of the promotion claims
Source reference: p. 3-4, para. 5-6Holding
The Tribunal disposed of the Original Application at the admission stage without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case
It directed the competent authority among the respondents to consider and decide the applicant's pending representations (dated 23.08.2023 and 30.12.2025) by passing a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with the law within four weeks from the receipt of the certified copy of the order
Source reference: p. 3, para. 5All pending Miscellaneous Applications were also disposed of with no order as to costs
Source reference: p. 4, para. 8-9Original Court PDF
Vijay KumarvsUNION OF INDIA
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in