Kuldeep vs U.O.I. Thru. Secy. Rural Devt. & ...
2018 Latest Caselaw 4136 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 

AFR
 
Court No. - 5
 

 
Case :- MISC. BENCH No. - 34894 of 2018
 

 
Petitioner :- Kuldeep
 
Respondent :- U.O.I. Thru. Secy. Rural Devt. & Ors.
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Nisha Tiwari
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,A.S.G.
 

 
Hon'ble Dr. Devendra Kumar Arora,J.

Hon'ble Alok Mathur,J.

1. Heard Ms. Nisha Tiwari, learned counsel for petitioner, Sri Anand Dwivedi, learned counsel appearing for respondent no. 1 and learned Standing Counsel has put in appearance on behalf of respondent no. 2, 3 and 4. With the consent of learned counsel for the parties, we proceed to dispose of the writ petition at admission stage itself.

2. By means of this writ petition the petitioner has sought writ of certiorari quashing the impugned order dated 12.11.2018, passed by the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh, thereby directing recovery of Rs.35,356/- from the petitioner.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the aforesaid order has been passed after conducting an enquiry against the petitioner wherein serious allegations regarding misappropriation of funds allocated for MENREGA Scheme (hereinafter referred to as 'Scheme'), have been made. Pursuant to the said order recovery of Rs.35,356.00 has been sought to be made from the petitioner. It is further submitted that a show cause notice was issued to the petitioner on 8th August, 2018, pointing out deficiency in the work conducted by the petitioner. The petitioner replied to the aforesaid show cause notice on 20th August, 2018, denying the allegations made against him the notice.

4. The petitioner has assailed the aforesaid impugned order on the ground that same has been passed without considering the reply sent by the petitioner or recording any finding with regard to the explanation given by him, which is in total violation of the principles of natural justice and is therefore, illegal and arbitrary and violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India.

5. Perusal of the impugned order would indicate that there is no consideration of the reply submitted by the petitioner and neither any charge nor any finding has been recorded with regard to the allegations leveled against the petitioner while executing the work allocated to him under the Scheme. The authority concerned without taking any note of the charges leveled against the petitioner and without considering the reply of the petitioner, has passed the order impugned, in total violation of principles of natural justice.

6. An order without valid reasons cannot be sustained. To give reasons is the rule of natural justice. Highlighting this rule, Hon'ble Supreme Court held in the case of The Secretary & Curator, Victoria Memorial v. Howrah Ganatantrik Nagrik Samity and ors., JT 2010(2)SC 566 para 31 to 33 as under :

"31. It is a settled legal proposition that not only administrative but also judicial order must be supported by reasons, recorded in it. Thus, while deciding an issue, the Court is bound to give reasons for its conclusion. It is the duty and obligation on the part of the Court to record reasons while disposing of the case. The hallmark of an order and exercise of judicial power by a judicial forum is to disclose its reasons by itself and giving of reasons has always been insisted upon as one of the fundamentals of sound administration justice - delivery system, to make known that there had been proper and due application of mind to the issue before the Court and also as an essential requisite of principles of natural justice. The giving of reasons for a decision is an essential attribute of judicial and judicious disposal of a matter before Courts, and which is the only indication to know about the manner and quality of exercise undertaken, as also the fact that the Court concerned had really applied its mind. "

32. Reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion. It introduces clarity in an order and without the same, it becomes lifeless. Reasons substitute subjectivity by objectivity. Absence of reasons renders the order indefensible/unsustainable particularly when the order is subject to further challenge before a higher forum."

33.Thus, it is evident that the recording of reasons is principle of natural justice and every judicial order must be supported by reasons recorded in writing. It ensures transparency and fairness in decision making. The person who is adversely affected may know, as why his application has been rejected."

7. Non recording of reasons, non consideration of admissible evidence or consideration of inadmissible evidence renders the order to be unsustainable. Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Chandana Impex Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Customs, New Delhi, 2011(269)E.L.T. 433 (S.C.)(para 8) held as under :

"8. Having bestowed our anxious consideration on the facts at hand, we are of the opinion that there is some merit in the submission of learned counsel for the appellant that while dealing with an appeal under Section 130 of the Act, the High Court should have examined each question formulated in the appeal with reference to the material taken into consideration by the Tribunal in support of its finding thereon and given its reasons for holding that question is not a substantial question of law. It needs to be emphasised that every litigant, who approaches the court for relief is entitled to know the reason for acceptance or rejection of his prayer, particularly when either of the parties to the lis has a right of further appeal. Unless the litigant is made aware of the reasons which weighed with the court in denying him the relief prayed for, the remedy of appeal will not be meaningful. It is that reasoning, which can be subjected to examination at the higher forums. In State of Orissa Vs. Dhaniram Luhar2 this Court, while reiterating that reason is the heart beat of every conclusion and without the same, it becomes lifeless, observed thus :

"8.......Right to reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system; reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind to the matter before court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made;......."

8. The Supreme Court in State of Rajasthan v. Rajendra Prasad Jain, (2008)15 SSC 711 stated that 'reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion, and without the same it becomes lifeless.'

9. Providing of reasons in orders is of essence in judicial proceedings. Every litigant who approaches the Court with a prayer is entitled to know the reasons for acceptance or rejection of such request. It is the reasoning which ultimately culminates into final decision which may be subject to examination of the appellate or other higher Courts.

10. The Court cannot lose sight of the fact that a losing litigant has a cause to plead and a right to challenge the order if it is adverse to him. Whether an argument was rejected validly or otherwise, reasoning of the order alone can show. To evaluate the submissions is obligation of the authority and to know the reasons for rejection of its contention is a legitimate expectation on the part of the litigant. Another facet of providing reasoning is to give it a value of precedent which can help in reduction of frivolous litigation. Paul D. Carrington, Daniel J Meador and Maurice Rosenburg, Justice on Appeal 10 (West 1976), observed as under:-

"When reasons are announced and can be weighed, the public can have assurance that the correcting process is working. Announcing reasons can also provide public understanding of how the numerous decisions of the system are integrated. In a busy Court, the reasons are an essential demonstration that the Court did in fact fix its mind on the case at hand. An unreasoned decision has very little claim to acceptance by the defeated party, and is difficult or impossible to accept as an act reflecting systematic application of legal principles. Moreover, the necessity of stating reasons not infrequently changes the results by forcing the judges to come to grips with nettlesome facts or issues which their normal instincts would otherwise cause them to avoid."

11. The reasoning in the opinion of the authority, thus, can effectively be analysed or scrutinized by the Court. The reasons indicated by the authority could be accepted by the Court without presuming what weighed with the authority while coming to the impugned decision. The cause of expeditious and effective disposal would be furthered by such an approach. A right of appeal could be created by a special statute or under the provisions of the Code governing the procedure. In either of them, absence of reasoning may have the effect of negating the purpose or right of appeal and, thus, may not achieve the ends of justice.

12. We would emphasize the principle that when reasons are recorded they can be weighed, the public can have assurance that process of correction is in place and working. It is the requirement of law that correction process of judgments should not only appear to be implemented but also seem to have been properly implemented. Reasons for an order would ensure and enhance public confidence and would provide due satisfaction to the consumer of justice under our justice dispensation system.

13. We are satisfied that the respondents have passed the impugned order without providing opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, wherein neither charges nor reply of the petitioner has been considered, and recovery has been ordered against him, only on the basis of inquiry report, thus, the order impugned is bad in law and liable to be set aside.

14. In the light factual matrix and legal proposition discussed above, the impugned order dated 12th November, 2018 is hereby set aside, sofar as it relates to the petitioner. 

15. The respondents are directed to pass a fresh order after considering the reply dated 20th August, 2018 given by the petitioner by a reasoned and speaking order, within a period of two weeks' from the date of production of certified copy of this order.

16. Learned Standing Counsel is directed to serve a certified copy of this order to the District Magistrate, Pratapgarh for strict compliance.

17. At this stage it is made clear that we have not made any observation with regard to the merits of the case or in respect to the charges leveled against the petitioner. The Authority concerned is at liberty to pass fresh orders, in accordance with law keeping in view the observations made by this Court and merits of the case.

18. The writ petition is accordingly allowed.

Order Date :- 5.12.2018

A. Verma