Court No. - 29
Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 90 of 2019 Appellant :- Harish Kumar Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Appellant :- Ratnesh Kumar Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
Hon'ble Pankaj Mithal,J. Hon'ble Rohit Ranjan Agarwal,J.
The writ petition of the petitioner was decided without hearing learned counsel for the petitioners.
The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner-appellants is that the learned counsel could not get any information of the listing of the writ petition and that even if the writ petition was to be decided in his absence then at least all points arising and raised in the writ petition ought to have been dealt with and decided by the Writ Court, which has not been done. Therefore, the order of the learned Single Judge is a non-speaking order. Moreover, the writ petition had not become infructuous and it was required to be decided on merits.
Learned Standing Counsel accepts that the cause of action in the petition continues to survive.
A perusal of the impugned order of the learned Single Judge dated 21.12.2018 reveals that the Court after noting the prayers as made in the writ petition simply stated that from the pleadings in the writ petition, it appears that the petitioner has failed to make out a case for grant of any of the reliefs as claimed. It does not touch upon the merits any of the orders which were impugned in the writ petition. Thus, it is an order completely uninformed of reasons.
A similar order dismissing the writ petition came up for consideration before another Division Bench presided over by the Hon'ble Chief Justice in Special Appeal Defective No.248 of 2018, Sudha Singh Vs. District Inspector of Schools and others.
The Division Bench on the perusal of the impugned order passed by the writ court held that it is apparent that the petition has been dismissed without assigning reasons which is against the well settled principle that while disposing a petition on merits, the Court ought to assign reasons in support of its finding. Since no reasons were assigned in dismissing the petition, the order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the writ court for decision afresh.
In view of the above, we are of the view as the order impugned passed by the learned Single Judge is uninformed of reasons, it cannot be sustained in law. It is accordingly set aside and the matter is remitted to the Writ Court for deciding the petition on its own merits after hearing the parties in accordance with law.
The appeal is allowed.
Order Date :- 22.1.2019/Ashutosh Pandey