1. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State.
2. The petitioner has approached this Court with the following main prayers:
"issue a writ or order or direction in the nature of Certiorari quashing impugned order dated 08.10.2020 contained in Letter No.5764 passed by opposite party no.3 i.e. District Panchayat Raj Officer Sultanpur imposing surcharge on the petitioner, to the tune of Rs.360000/- and directing him to deposit the same in A/c No.1844101000426 of Canara Bank Dhanpatganj Sultanpur within a week, as contained in Annexure No.1 to the writ petition."
3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that impugned order dated 08.10.2020 has been passed by respondent no.3 - District Panchayat Raj Officer Sultanpur without considering the contentions made in the reply dated 09.06.2020 (annexed as Annexure no.3 to the writ petition) to the Show Cause Notice dated 13.05.2020. It has also been submitted that while passing the impugned order, respondent no.3 has not assigned any reason as to why the reply to the Show Cause Notice has been rejected. He has further submitted that while passing the impugned order, the concerned Officer only assigned the reason that the reply of the Show Cause Notice is not satisfactory. Since the impugned order has been passed without following the procedure provided under Rule 256 and 257 of the U.P. Panchayat Raj Rules, 1947 and as such the impugned order is non-est in the eye of law and is liable to be set aside.
4. Learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed the prayer of the petitioner and submitted that while passing the impugned order dated 08.10.2020, the authority concerned has considered the contentions made in the reply of the Show Cause Notice as well as other materials and evidences on record. The petitioner was found guilty in the enquiry and therefore, it is not correct to say that the impugned order is non speaking. Learned counsel for the respondents submits that the writ petition has no merit and it is to be dismissed.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. Respondent no.3 while passing the impugned order dated 08.10.2020 has assigned only the reason that "???????????? ???????? ?? ????????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ????????? ???? ??? ?? I". Thus, no detailed findings/reasons for not accepting the reply to the show cause notice have been given by respondent no.3. A fact finding authority is under statutory obligation to consider with due care every fact for and against the petitioner and to record its finding in a manner which would clearly indicate as to whether the facts on which the order was passed have been established. Absence of the findings to disclose reasons in an order in the manner indicated in the impugned order would render the order to be indefensible/unsustainable.
7. Reason is the heart beat of every conclusion. In the absence of reasons the order becomes lifeless. Non recording of reasons renders the order to be violative of principles of natural justice. Reasons ensures transparency and fairness in decision making. It enables litigant to know reasons for acceptance or rejection of his prayer. It is statutory requirement of natural justice. Reasons are really linchpin to administration of justice. It is link between the mind of the decision taker and the controversy in question. Thus failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice.
8. In view of the aforesaid, since no valid reasons have been recorded for the conclusion reached in the impugned order dated 08.10.2020 and as such it can not be sustained and, is therefore, quashed.
9. The writ petition is allowed.
10. Matter is remitted back to respondent no.3 to pass afresh order, if he so chooses, in accordance with law. The order, if any, shall be passed by respondent no3 expeditiously, preferably within two months from today after affording reasonable opportunities of hearing to the petitioner.
Order Date :- 22.2.2021 Adarsh K Singh