Pending regularisation representations must be decided by a reasoned order within six weeks.

Thirty-eight applicants, engaged as casual workers or daily wagers on muster rolls in different Income Tax Department offices, sought regularisation and consequential benefits, claiming approximately 18 to 26 years of continuous service

They relied on Government instructions, judicial decisions and the treatment of similarly situated workers. After submitting representations dated 28 April 2026 and 26 May 2026, which they said remained undecided, they filed the OA

At the hearing, counsel limited the requested relief to a direction that the respondents decide those representations

The Tribunal also allowed the applicants’ application to join in filing the OA

1. Whether the respondents should be directed to consider and decide the applicants’ pending representations concerning regularisation and related benefits

2. Whether the Tribunal should determine the applicants’ substantive entitlement to regularisation at this stage, given the limited relief sought

The applicants relied on the DoPT Office Memorandum dated 11 December 2006, Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi (3), Raman Kumar v. Union of India, Pawan Kumar & Others v. Union of India, and decisions concerning similarly situated employees

The Tribunal did not interpret or apply those authorities to determine entitlement to regularisation; it expressly left the merits open and directed the competent authority to decide the representations by a reasoned and speaking order

Because counsel sought only a decision on the pending representations, the Tribunal confined its order to that procedural relief rather than adjudicating whether the applicants met the legal requirements for regularisation

It directed the competent authority to consider the representations and give a reasoned and speaking order, while clarifying that it had expressed no opinion on the merits

The Tribunal made no finding on the applicants’ substantive claims for regularisation, and there was no order as to costs