ivil Appeal No 1976 of 1991
From the Judgment and Order dated 2771987 of the Central Administrative Tribunal Delhi in Regn
No OANo 511 of 1986
VC Mahajan CVS Rao AK Srivastava and PParmeshwaran for the Appeallants
Dr DC Vohra PK Bansal and SK Bisaria for the Respondent
The Judgment of Court was delivered by SINGH J Leave granted
This appeal is directed against the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal Principal Bench Delhi quashing the order of the Ministry of Commerce dated 611986 rejecting the respondent s representation against remarks awarded to him
EG Nambudiri respondent is a Section Officer in the office of Chief Controller of Import and Exports Ministry of Commerce
By a 455 memorandum dated 7th May 1985 the Director communicated adverse remarks awarded to the respondent for the year ending 1984
These remarks were under 1
That you were not associated with the important work of the section such as the open house discussions monthly analysis of the returns received from regional offices complaints and port Officers meetings
That the quality of performance and application of knowledge delegated authority and conceptual and professional skills on the jobs is very poor
That you had a casual attitude to the work assigned
Your devotion to duty was insufficient
That subordinates used to complain that they could not work under you as you could not give proper guidance
That your job did not involve contact with the public indications and your intellectual honesty and innovative opaity are average
That nothing adverse has come to notice regarding your integrity
That you were given advicewarning at various levels both orally and in writing but you did not react to these
 The respondent made representation against the adverse remarks but the same was rejected by the order dated 611986
The respondent thereafter made a memorial to the President of India against the adverse remarks as a result of which the adverse remarks as contained in Item Nos
1 to 4 as quoted above were expunged whereas the remaining adverse entries were maintained
The Govt s decision was communicated by a memorandum dated 1481986
But before the aforesaid decision of the Government partially expunging the adverse remarks could be communicated to the respondent he filed a petition before the Central Administrative Tribunal challenging the order of the Ministry of Commerce dated 611986 rejecting his representation made against the adverse entries
The respondent challenged the order dated 611986 rejecting his representation on the ground that it did not contain any reasons
Plea of mala fide was also raised against the Joint Director Ministry of Commerce who had awarded the adverse 456 remarks to the respondent
The Tribunal by its order dated 2771987 quashed the Government Order as contained in the communication letter dated 611986 and also subsequent order dated 1481986 on the ground that those orders were vitiated in law in the absence of reasons
The Tribunal held that it was a basic principle of natural justice of every quasi judicial process that order should contain reasons
Arriving at a just decision is the aim of both quasi judicial as well as administrative inquiries an unjust decision in an administrative enquiry may have more far reaching effect than in a quasi Judicial enquiry therefore it was necessary that in rejecting the representation against an adverse entry reasons must be stated and in the absence of reasons the order would be arbitrary and liable to be quashed
Placing reliance on a number of decisions of High Courts the Tribunal held that a bald communication rejecting the representation made against the adverse entries does not meet the requirement of law
The Tribunal further held that in the absence of reasons it would follow that the competent authority rejected the representation without applying its mind to the grounds raised in the representation
Learned counsel for the parties conceded that there are no statutory rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution regulating the award of entries in the character roll of a Central Government employee or providing for filing of representation against the adverse entries or its disposal
The entire field in this regard is regulated by administrative directions issued from time to time
Under these directions the character roll of Government servants is required to be maintained wherein the entries are made every year by superior competent authority regarding the work conduct and character of the Government servant
These entries are confidential in nature which contain the assessment of the work and conduct of the Government servant reflecting his efficiency or defect in his work and conduct
The confidential reports contain general assessment of character conduct and qualities of a Govt
Servant which may include comments about his good work drive initiative devotion to duty and integrity
These entries also reflect the inefficiency delay lack of initiative carelessness in handling the problems or any defect in character and integrity
These entries contain reference to any penalty which may have been awarded to a government servant in departmental proceedings
These entries are important in nature as on the basis of these entries a Government servant s suitability to the office is assessed for the purposes of his confirmation promotion and even for retention in service
Any adverse remark awarded against a Government servant is 457 communicated to him to afford him opportunity of explaining the correct position by means of a representation
The competent authority is required to examine the adverse remarks in consultation if necessary with the reporting officer and counter signing authority
If the competent authority finds that the remarks are justified and there are no sufficient grounds for interference he may reject the representation and the Government servant is informed accordingly
If however the competent authority finds that the adverse remarks are incorrect unfounded or unjustified he would expunge the same and inform the Government servant
The competent authority may having regard to the facts and circumstances of the cast modify or tone down the remarks
The administrative instructions issued by the Government do not require the competent authority to record reasons either in accepting or rejecting the representation of a Government servant made against adverse entries
Entries made in the character roll and confidential record of a Government servant are confidential and those do not by themselves affect any right of the Government servant but those entries assume importance and play vital role in the matter relating to confirmation crossing of efficiency bar promotion and retention in service
Once an adverse report is recorded the principles of natural justice require the reporting authority to communicate the same to the Government servant to enable him to improve his work and conduct and also to explain the circumstances leading to the report
Such an opportunity is not an empty formality its object partially being to enable the superior authorities to decide on a consideration of the explanation offered by the person concerned whether the adverse report is justified
The superior authority competent to decide the representation is required to consider the explanation offered by the Government servant before taking a decision in the matter
Any adverse report which is not communicated to the Government servant or if he is denied the opportunity of making representation to the superior authority cannot be considered against him
See Gurdial Singh Fijji vs State of Punjab  Ors In the circumstances it is necessary that the authority must consider the explanation offered by the Government servant and to decide the same in a fair and just manner
The question then arises whether in considering and deciding the representation against report the authorities are duty bound to record reasons or to communicate the same to the person concerned
Ordinarily Courts and Tribunals adjudicating rights of parties are required to act judicially and to record reasons
Where an administrative authority is required to act judicially it is also under an 458 obligation to record reasons
But every administrative authority is not under any legal obligation to record reasons for its decision although it is always desirable to record reasons to avoid any suspicion
Where a statute requires an authority though acting administratively to record reasons it is mandatory for the authority to pass speaking orders and the absence of any statutory or administrative requirement to record reasons the order of the administrative authority is not rendered illegal for absence of reasons
If any challenge is made to the validity of an order on the ground of it being arbitrary or mala fide it is always open to the authority concerned to place reasons before the Court which may have persuaded it to pass the orders
Such reasons must already exist on records as it is not permissible to the authority to support the order by reasons not contained in the records
Reasons are not necessary to be communicated to the Government servant
If the statutory rules require communication of reasons the same must be communicated but in the absence of any such provision absence of communication of reasons do not affect the validity of the order
On behalf of the respondent it was contended that principles of natural justice require the superior authority to record reasons in rejecting the Government servant s representation made against the adverse remarks as the order of rejection affected the respondent s right
It is true that the distinction between judicial act and administrative act has withered away and the principles of natural justice are now applied even to administrative orders which involve civil consequences as held by this Court in State of Orissa vs Dr Miss Binapani Dei  Ors  What is a civil consequence has been answered by this Court in Mohinder Singh Gill  Ors
vs The Chief Election Commissioner New Delhi  Ors Krishna Iyer J speaking for the Constitution Bench observed But what is a civil consequence let us ask ourselves by passing verbal booby traps Civil consequences undoubtedly cover infraction of not merely property or personal rights out of civil liberties material deprivations and nonpecuniary damages
In its comprehensive connotation everything that affects a citizen in his civil life inflicts a civil consequence
 The purpose of the rules of natural justice is to prevent miscarriage of justice and it is no more in doubt that the principles of natural justice are applicable to administrative orders if such orders affect the right of 459 a citizen
Arriving at the just decision is the aim of both quasi judicial as well as administrative enquire an unjust decision in an administrative enquiry may have more far reaching effect than decision in a quasi judicial enquiry
Now there is no doubt that the principles of natural justice are applicable even to administrative inquiries
See AK Kraipak  Ors
vs Union of India  Ors The question is whether principles of natural justice require an administrative authority to record reasons
Generally principles of natural justice require that opportunity of hearing should be given to the person against whom an administrative order is passed
The application of principles of natural justice and its sweep depend upon the nature of the rights involved having regard to the setting and context of the statutory provisions
Where a vested right is adversely affected by an administrative order or where civil consequences ensue principles of natural justice apply even if the statutory provisions do not make any express provision for the same and the person concerned must be afforded opportunity of hearing before the order is passed
But principles of natural justice do not require the administrative authority to record reasons for its decision as there is no general rule that reasons must be given for administrative decision
Order of an administrative authority which has no statutory or implied duty to state reasons or the grounds of it decision is not rendered illegal merely on account of absence of reasons
It has never been a principle of natural justice that reasons should be given for decisions
See Regina vs Gaming Board for Great Britain ex p Benaim and Khaida  at 431
Though the principles of natural justice do not require reasons for decision there is necessity for giving reasons in view of the expanding law of judicial review to enable the citizens to discover the reasoning behind the decision
Right to reasons is an indispensable part of a sound system of judicial review
Under our Constitution an administrative decision is subject to judicial review if it affects the right of a citizen it is therefore desirable that reasons should be stated
There are however many areas of administrative activity where no reasons are recorded or communicated if such a decision is challenged before the Court for judicial review the reasons for the decision may be placed before the court
The superior authority while considering the representation of a Government servant against adverse remarks is not required by law to act judicially it is under no legal obligation to record or communicate reasons for its decision to the Government servant
The decision rejecting the representation does 460 not adversely affect any vested right of the Government servant nor does it visit him with any civil consequences
In many cases having regard to infinite variations of circumstances it may not be possible to disclose reasons for the opinion formed about the work and conduct or character of the Government servant
In the instant case adverse remarks as contained in item Nos 1 to 4 were expunged but those at serial numbers 5 and 6 were not expunged and the respondent s representation to that extent was rejected
On a careful scrutiny of the two remarks it would appear that observation contained in Item No 5 that nothing adverse has come to notice regarding your integrity is not adverse to the respondent s work and conduct
These remarks are neutral in nature and they do not adversely comment upon the respondent s work conduct or character though they are no commendatory in nature
As regards the remarks at Serial No 6 they are self explanatory which show that inspite of oral and written warnings the respondent the respondent did not improve
If the superior authority was not satisfied with the explanation of the respondent as cantained in his representation what reasons could be stated except that the authority was not satisfied with the explanation
The superior authority was not obliged to write detail judgment or order giving detais of the warnings or the material on which he formed opinion
There is no dispute that there is no rule or administrative order for recording reasons in rejecting a representation
In the absence of any statutory rule or statutory instructions requiring the competent authority to record reasons in rejecting a representation made by a Government servant against the adverse entries the competent authority is not under any obligation to record reason
But the competent authority has no licence to act arbitrarily he must act in a fair and just manner
He is required to consider the questions raised by the Government servant and examine the same in the light of the comments made by the office awarding the adverse entries and the officer counter signing the same
If the representation is rejected after its consideration in a fair and just manner the order of rejection would not be rendered illegal merely on the ground of absence of reasons
In the absence of any statutory or administrative provision requiring the competent authority to record reasons or to communicate reasons no exception can be taken to the order rejecting representation merely on the ground of absence of reasons
No order of an administrative authority communicating its decision is rendered illegal on the ground of absence of reasons ex facie and it is not open to the court to interfere with such orders merely on the ground of absence of any reasons
However it does not mean that the administrative authority 461 is at liberty to pass orders without there being any reasons for the same
In governmental functioning before any order is issued the matter is generally considered at various levels and the reasons and opinions are contained in the notes on the file
The reasons contained in the file enable the competent authority to formulate its opinion
If the order as communicated to the Government servant rejecting the representation does not contain any reasons the order cannot be held to be bad in law
If such an order is challenged in a court of law it is always open to the competent authority to place the reasons before the Court which may have led to the rejection of the representation
it is always open to an administrative authority to produce evidence alinude before the court to justify its action
The President was under no legal obligation to record reasons in rejecting the respondent s representation against the adverse remarks
Consequently the order of the president was not vitiated in law
The Central Administrative Tribunal committed error in quashing the order of the president as well as the order of the Ministry of Commerce dated 611986
Assuming that there was some defect in the order rejecting the respondent s representation the Tribunal was not justified in holding that the adverse entries awarded to the respondent should be treated as having been expunged
We accordingly allow the appeal set aside the order of the Tribunal dated 2771987
There will be no order as to costs
TNA Appeal allowed


Summary:
On the application for pre mature release made by the respondent who was undergoing sentence of life imprisonment and had served a period of eleven and a half years the High Court directed that the respondent s mercy petition pending before the Governor should be decided within three months
Since this was not done the High Court directed his release on bail observing that if his mercy petition was dismissed he would have to surrender
Against this decision the State filed an appeal before this Court
Allowing the appeal this Court HELD The High Court has not taken into consideration the provisions of Section 433A of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 while passing the order for the respondent s release on bail
The judicial proceeding dealing with the conviction and sentence of the accused had been earlier concluded and the order was passed while finally disposing of the writ petition alleging delay in disposal of the mercy petition
Thus no case is now pending before the court
The order for the respondent s release on bail has not therefore been passed as an interim measure pending the decision of a case before the Court
In such a situation the provisions of Section 433A are attracted
The words such person shall not be released from prison are wide in their application and cannot be restricted only to case where the person has been released finally
The judgment in question is set aside and the case remitted to the High Court for reconsideration of writ petition confined to its limited scope