Tribunal directs competent authority to decide promotional-cadre grievance by a reasoned, speaking order.

The applicant, an Assistant Stockman in the Sheep Husbandry Department, UT of Ladakh, claimed that under the recruitment rules applicable before the reorganisation of the erstwhile State of Jammu and Kashmir, the post of Mali carried a promotional avenue to Rukh-Overseer.

He alleged that the subsequent Recruitment Rules, 2022 introduced Assistant Stockman as an intermediate post and thereby disturbed his promotional hierarchy, seniority, and prospects of promotion to Rukh-Overseer.

Invoking Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, he sought quashing of the departmental actions affecting his promotional avenue, restoration of the Mali–Rukh-Overseer promotional line, and consideration for promotion with consequential benefits.

During the hearing, the applicant requested that his grievance be considered by the competent authority under the applicable rules and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019.

Whether the applicant’s claim regarding restoration of the earlier Mali–Rukh-Overseer promotional avenue and protection of his seniority and service conditions required consideration under the applicable recruitment rules and the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019.

Whether the Original Application should be disposed of by directing the competent authority to examine the applicant’s grievance and pass a reasoned and speaking order, without the Tribunal adjudicating the merits at that stage.

The Tribunal exercised jurisdiction under Section 19 of the Administrative Tribunals Act, 1985, governing applications concerning service matters.

It directed consideration of the applicant’s grievance in accordance with the applicable service and recruitment rules and the relevant provisions of the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, including any protection available in respect of existing service conditions.

The Tribunal applied the principle that where a service grievance has not been examined by the competent departmental authority in the first instance, the authority should consider it and issue a reasoned and speaking order in accordance with law.

No precedent was cited, and the Tribunal expressly left the merits and all legal issues open.

The Tribunal noted that the applicant’s grievance concerned the effect of the Recruitment Rules, 2022 on his alleged pre-existing promotional avenue from Mali to Rukh-Overseer and the resulting impact on his seniority and promotional prospects.

Since the matter involved examination of the applicable recruitment rules, cadre structure, and any protection available under the Jammu and Kashmir Reorganisation Act, 2019, the Tribunal considered it appropriate for the competent authority to undertake the initial examination.

Accordingly, instead of deciding whether the applicant was legally entitled to restoration of the promotional line or promotion, the Tribunal treated the Original Application as a representation and required a lawful, reasoned, and speaking decision within the prescribed period.

The Tribunal specifically clarified that it had expressed no opinion on the merits.

The competent authority was directed to consider, particularly, the applicant’s claim concerning his promotional avenue, cadre position, and protection of service rights under the applicable rules and law, and to pass a reasoned and speaking order within six weeks from receipt of a certified copy of the order.

The decision was to be communicated to the applicant forthwith.

The Tribunal did not grant the substantive reliefs sought, leaving all issues open for determination by the competent authority; there was no order as to costs.