The competent authority must decide regularisation representations by a reasoned order.

The applicants, engaged as Medical Officers, Paediatricians or Pathologists between 2004 and 2013, claimed that they had been selected through public advertisements, served continuously on successive contractual extensions, and performed regular and perennial duties.

After submitting a representation dated 10 February 2026 and a reminder dated 19 March 2026 without receiving a decision, they filed this Original Application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

At the admission stage, the Tribunal noted that it was not necessary to decide the merits of their claims because the representations remained undecided.

1. Whether the Tribunal should adjudicate the applicants’ substantive claims for regularisation and related benefits when their representations had not yet been decided by the competent authority.

2. Whether the competent authority should be directed to consider the applicants’ representations and issue a reasoned decision.

Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985 provided the procedural basis for the Original Application.

The applicants relied on Articles 14, 16 and 21 of the Constitution and on authorities concerning regularisation of long-serving contractual employees, including Secretary, State of Karnataka v. Uma Devi (3), Sheo Narain Nagar v. State of U.P., and other decisions cited in their submissions.

The Tribunal did not adopt or apply those substantive principles to determine entitlement; it left their relevance and application to the competent authority, subject to applicable rules, policy and law.

The Tribunal treated the absence of a decision on the applicants’ representation and reminder as the immediate matter requiring action.

It considered that the applicants’ contentions and cited precedents should first be addressed by the competent authority through an independent, reasoned decision.

Accordingly, it declined to determine whether the applicants were entitled to regularisation, equal pay or consequential benefits, and directed the authority to consider the representations and supporting material, including the cited judicial decisions to the extent applicable.

It directed the competent authority among the respondents to consider the representation dated 10 February 2026 and reminder dated 19 March 2026, together with supporting material, and pass a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law within eight weeks of receiving a certified copy of the order.

The decision must be communicated to the applicants individually; all substantive claims were left open.