Court No. - 10
Case :- MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 4501 of 2020 Petitioner :- Smt. Beena Kumari @ Gudiya Respondent :- Dhani Ram Counsel for Petitioner :- Vimal Kumar
Hon'ble Prakash Padia,J.
The petitioner has preferred the present petition Under Article 227 of the Constitution of India with the prayer to set aside the order dated 13.01.2020 passed by the District Judge, Kanpur Dehat, copy of which is appended as Annexure-8 to the writ petition.
It appears from perusal of the record that application filed by the petitioner for the grant of interim injunction being Application No. 6 Ga 2 rejected by the trial court namely Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kanpur Dehat vide order dated 21.10.2019. Against the aforesaid order Misc. Appeal No. 20 of 2019 was preferred by the petitioner. In the said appeal an order impugned has been passed by the District Judge, Kanpur Dehat on 13.01.2020 rejecting the application for the grant of interim relief.
It is argued by the counsel for the petitioner that no reason whatsoever has been assigned by the trial Court while rejecting the application in question.
I have perused the order dated 13.01.2020, it is clear from perusal of the same that no reason whatsoever has been given by the trial court while rejecting the aforesaid application.
Heard counsel for the petitioner and perused the record.
The Supreme Court in case of Assistant Commissioner, Commercial Tax Department, Works Contract and Leasing, Kota Vs. M/s Shukla and Brothers reported at 2010 AIR SCW 3277 dealt with the principles of law while exercising power of judicial review on administrative action. It was held by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid case that the doctrine of audi alteram partem has three basic essentials-
i) A person against whom an order is required to be passed or whose rights are likely to be affected adversely must be granted an opportunity of being heard.
ii) The concerned authority should provide a fair and transparent procedure.
iii) The authority concerned must apply its mind and dispose of the matter by a reasoned or speaking order.
Paragraph 9 of the aforesaid judgment is quoted below-
"9. The increasing institution of cases in all Courts in India and its resultant burden upon the Courts has invited attention of all concerned in the justice administration system. Despite heavy quantum of cases in Courts, in our view, it would neither be permissible nor possible to state as a principle of law, that while exercising power of judicial review on administrative action and more particularly judgment of courts in appeal before the higher Court, providing of reasons can never be dispensed with. The doctrine of audi alteram partem has three basic essentials. Firstly, a person against whom an order is required to be passed or whose rights are likely to be affected adversely must be granted an opportunity of being heard. Secondly, the concerned authority should provide a fair and transparent procedure and lastly, the authority concerned must apply its mind and dispose of the matter by a reasoned or speaking order. This has been uniformly applied by courts in India and abroad."
In view of the same, an order dated 13.01.2020 is liable to be set aside, the same is hereby set aside.
The district judge, Kanpur Dehat is directed to pass appropriate speaking and reasoned order on the application for grant of interim injunction in accordance with law, most expeditiously and preferably within a period of three months from the date of presentation of self attested computer generated copy of this order downloaded from the official website of High Court Allahabad.
With the aforesaid observations, the present petition is allowed.
Order Date :- 6.1.2021 Swati