IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.16617 of 2010 1. SANJU KUMARI W/O SRI ABHAY KUMAR R/O VILL.- PARSOUNI BAIJ, P.S.- PIPRAHI, DISTT.- SHEOHAR 2. BINDU BHARTI W/O SHRI AMIT KUMAR R/O PARSOUNI BAIJ, P.S.- PIPRAHI, DISTT.- SHEOHAR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COMMISSIONER-CUM-SECRETARY HUMAN RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, BIHAR AT PATNA 2. THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, SHEOHAR 3. DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION-CUM- DISTRICT PROGRAMME CO-ORDINATOR BIHAR EDUCATION PROJECT, SHEOHAR 4. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, KALYANPUR, DISTT.- EAST CHAMPARAN 5. MUKHIYA, GRAMPANCHAYAT RAJ, PERSOUNI BAIJ, SHEOHAR with CWJC No.16659 of 2010 1. DAYA SHANKAR PRASAD S/O SRI DIKPAL SAH R/O VILL.- PARSUNI BAIJ, P.S.- PIPRAHI, DISTT.- SHEOHAR Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, SHEOHAR 3. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF EDUCATION, SHEOHAR 4. THE GRAM PANCHAYAT RAJ, PARSAUNI BAIJ THROUGH ITS SECRETARY AT VILL.- PARSAUNI BAIJ, P.S.- PIPRAHI, DISTT.- SHEOHAR 5. THE DISTRICT TEACHER APPOINTMENT APPELLATE AUTHORITY, DISTT.- SHEOHAR THROUGH SRI B.P. YADAV, MEMBER ----------- 2 10/05/2011 In both the writ applications order dated 11.08.2010 passed by the District Teachers Appointment Appellate Authority, Sheohar in a batch of cases decided by a common order is under challenge. In C.W.J.C. No. - 2 - 16617 of 2010 the impugned order is annexure-15 whereas in C.W.J.C. No. 16659 of 2010, it is Annexure- 6. The order of the Appellate Authority is to be interfered with, if not on other ground, but on a solitary ground that this is a cryptic order which does not give any reason for reaching the conclusion which it has reached. Generality of reasons are not going to help the superior Court in understanding what transpired behind the said adjudication or the reasons why a quasi judicial authority came to a particular conclusion. Telegraphic order or orders which do not give reason in support of the decision are no order in the eye of law as has already been declared or held as such not only by this Court but even by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on many a occasion. In fact, such orders have been deprecated time and again for the basic legal principle that unless the mind of the adjudicating authority can be read through reading of the order in question, it is impossible for a superior forum to come to the conclusion whether the decision so rendered is rational, cogent and in accordance with law. - 3 - This being the background, the impugned orders contained in annexures 15 & 6 in the two writ applications are quashed. Matters are remanded back to the Appellate Authority, who will hear the parties and effectuate the grounds on the issue raised and the findings thereafter on the dispute which requires re- adjudication. Both the writ applications are allowed. AMIN/ (Ajay Kumar Tripathi, J.)