IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CWJC No.5170 of 2003 RAM ROOP BHAGAT Son of Late Chhedi Bhagat, retired Head Clerk cum Accountant, Manaihari Block Office, resident of village-Bari Nagar, Post Guru Bazar, District Katihar. Versus 1.THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2.The District Magistrate, Katihar. 3.Establishment Dy. Collector, Katihar. 4.Secretary to Divisional Commissioner, Purnea Division Purnea. ----------- 3 13/8/2009 Having considered the averments made in the writ application this much is clear that when the petitioner has a legitimate grievance with regard to his being deprived the promotion in super time scale, the same was required at least to be examined by the authorities in a fair and objective manner. In the present case when the decision was taken for grant of super time scale to others while depriving the same to the petitioner and the petitioner had filed a representation to the Collector of Katihar district, it was disposed of by an order holding that the petitioner had a forum of appeal and he should file such appeal before the Commissioner, as is the purport of communication in the order of the Deputy Collector as contained in Annexure-6. Thereafter, the petitioner had filed an appeal as would appear from Annexure 7 and he had given certain reasons and had also cited certain examples of his juniors who were given such 2 benefit of super time pay scale. The Commissioner, however, has passed the impugned order dated 1.10.1997 without disclosing any reason and in fact all that has been said is that the decision taken by the Collector being correct has been affirmed and reiterated by him. That however cannot be the manner in which the appellate authority would dispose of the claim of promotion of a person who has a grievance against decision of the original authority. By now it is well settled that any administrative order or an order passed by the authority in exercise of quasi judicial power must contain reasons. Reference in this connection may be made to the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of ‘The Siemens Engineering and Manufacturing Co. of India Ltd Vs. The Union of India & Ors’ reported in A.I.R. 1976 SC 1785 as also the subsequent judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of S.N. Mukherjee Vs. Union of India reported in AIR 1990 SC 1984. Thus, in absence of reasons the appellate order cannot be sustained and accordingly the same is hereby quashed with a direction to the Commissioner of Purnea Division to pass a fresh reasoned order in the appeal already filed by the petitioner vide Annexure-7 to this writ application within a period of three months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order and if in course of such reconsideration the Commissioner would find that the petitioner is entitled for super time scale, the consequential financial benefit must also be extended to the 3 petitioner within the next two months of passing such order. It goes without saying that while disposing of the appeal the appellate authority would be under obligation to discuss the grounds raised in the memo of appeal and record a clear finding in support of the conclusions arrived by him on the issue of grant of promotion in Super time Scale of Pay. With the aforementioned observations/directions this application is disposed of. Abhay Kumar (Mihir Kumar Jha, J.)