In CWP-7669-2022-PUNJ HC- Quasi-judicial authority is bound to pass well reasoned order; Non-speaking order deprives affected party of effective opportunity to represent against same & it leads to denial of Justice: P&H HC
Justices Lisa Gill & Harsh Bunger [28-09-2022]

Read Order: Mandir Thakur Dawara v. State of Punjab and Others

Monika Rahar

Chandigarh, October 7, 2022: While opining that the order condoning delay of more than 3 years in filing appeal without assigning any reasons and without giving the opposite party an opportunity of being heard, was totally "non-speaking", "sketchy" and "cryptic", the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has held that a quasi-judicial authority is bound to pass a well reasoned order.

"A non-speaking order deprives an affected party of an effective opportunity to represent against the same. Failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice", held the Bench of Justices Lisa Gill and Harsh Bunger. 

The petitioner was aggrieved by the impugned order whereby Director, Rural Development and Panchayat (exercising the powers of Commissioner), Punjab allowed an application under Section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963 filed by Gram Panchayat, Village Akbarpur, Tehsil and District Kapurthala seeking condonation of delay of 3 years and 10 months in filing appeal under Section 11 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulation) Act, 1961 by passing a totally non-speaking order.

The order of the Commissioner read as follows, “Delay is condoned. Case is adjourned for 08.04.2022 for arguments in the main case.”

After perusing the impugned order, the Court opined that the Appellate Authority failed to discharge the obligation placed upon it as the impugned order was totally non-speaking and cryptic. 

Against this backdrop, the Bench added, "It is well settled that a quasi-judicial authority is bound to pass a well reasoned order. A non-speaking order deprives an affected party of an effective opportunity to represent against the same."

Further, the Bench observed that admittedly the petitioner had a direct and substantial interest in the matter and thus, it was imperative for the Appellate Authority to record the specific reasons for condonation of delay in filing the appeal. 

"Admittedly in the present case, the impugned order is totally non-speaking, sketchy and cryptic with not even a whisper of any reasoning leave alone considered reasoning indicating the basis of the decision", the Bench held. 

Accordingly, the impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the Commissioner, Rural Development and Panchayat, Vikas Bhawan, Sector-62, SAS Nagar to pass a well reasoned and considered order on the application seeking condonation of delay in filing appeal under Section 11 of the Punjab Village Common Lands (Regulations) Act, 1961 in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the parties.