The competent authority must decide the appeal by a reasoned, speaking order within four weeks.

The applicant, an Additional Professor at AIIMS Rishikesh, pursued a one-year fellowship in the United States from 1 July 2023 to 30 June 2024. The respondents treated his absence as unauthorised.

By order dated 18 December 2025, the President of AIIMS Rishikesh directed that the period from 22 June 2023 to 8 August 2024 be treated as a “break in service,” relying on Rule 25 of the CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972, FR 17(1), and FR 17-A.

The applicant appealed on 23 December 2025, challenging the order, including on the grounds that it was non-speaking and that part of the period followed his submission of a joining report. The appeal remained undecided when he filed this application under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985.

Whether the Tribunal should direct the respondents to decide the applicant’s pending appeal against the break-in-service order by a reasoned and speaking order

Whether the Tribunal should determine the merits of the challenge to the break-in-service order at this stage

The application was brought under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, which provides the Tribunal’s jurisdiction to adjudicate service-related applications.

The impugned order invoked Rule 25 of the CCS (Leave) Rules, 1972, FR 17(1), and FR 17-A in treating the absence as a break in service.

The Tribunal did not interpret or apply those provisions to decide the substantive legality of the order; instead, it directed the competent authority to consider the pending appeal and issue a reasoned and speaking decision addressing the applicant’s contentions in light of the applicable rules and guidelines.

No precedent was cited.

The applicant expressly stated that he would be satisfied with an order requiring the competent authority to decide his pending appeal.

With the parties’ consent, the Tribunal therefore confined its consideration to that procedural relief and did not examine the merits of the break-in-service decision.

It directed the authority to address the contentions raised in the appeal under the applicable rules and guidelines and to do so expeditiously, preferably within four weeks of receiving a certified copy of the Tribunal’s order.

It directed the competent authority to consider and decide the applicant’s appeal dated 23 December 2025 by a reasoned and speaking order, preferably within four weeks of receipt of a certified copy of the Tribunal’s order.

No order as to costs was made.