IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA. C.W.P. (T) No. 10780 of 2008. Decided on 21st December, 2010. _____________________________________________________ Balwant Kumar. …Petitioner. -Versus- The Himachal Pradesh Road Transport Corporation and Others. …Respondents. Coram: The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Rajiv Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 No. __________________________________________________________ For the petitioner. : Mr. R.S. Gautam, Advocate. For the respondents. : Mr. Adarsh Sharma, Advocate. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rajiv Sharma, Judge (Oral): Petitioner has already filed an appeal against the office order dated 02.05.2003 to the Divisional Manager, of the respondent-Corporation on 30.05.2003 (Annexure A-7). However, the same has been rejected vide order dated 06.08.2003, Annexure A-8 without a speaking order. It is now well settled that the orders passed by the appellate authority must be speaking and reasoned. The appellate authority has to take into consideration all the grounds raised in the memorandum of appeal. There must be due application of mind while deciding a statutory appeal. The appeal preferred by the petitioner ought to have been decided by a speaking order. 2. Accordingly, the petition is allowed. Annexure A-8, dated 06.08.2003 is quashed and set aside. The Divisional Manager, H.R.T.C. is directed to re-hear the appeal preferred by 1 Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?. No. - 2 - the petitioner on 30.05.2003 (Annexure A-7) and decide the same by a speaking order, within a period of two months after the production of a certified copy of this judgment by the petitioner. No costs. (Rajiv Sharma) Judge December 21, 2010. (bhupender) - 3 - `