CWP(T) No. 7493 of 2008. 09.07.2009 Present: Mr. Dharamveer Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. D.N. Ronta, Advocate, for the respondents. The petitioner has approached the Learned Administrative Tribunal by way of Original Application No. 1665 of 1997. He has sought a very limited relief to the effect that the respondents be directed to consider his case within a time bound frame as per Annexure A-13. The Tribunal directed the respondents to place the matter of the petitioner before the Service Committee for ex- post-facto creation of post and to consider his case for regularization. It was directed to be decided within a period of two months. The order was passed by the learned Administrative Tribunal on 13th December, 1999. In sequel thereto, the matter was placed before the Service Committee. The Service Committee decided the representation of the petitioner as per Annexure R-5, but without assigning any reasons. It is settled law that any order which has civil consequences, must contain reasons and it should be self contained. The decision was taken by the Service Committee on 4th March, 2000. The Court is of the considered opinion that the matter should be re-considered by the Service Committee and it should assign the reasons while accepting or rejecting the representation. Accordingly, Annexure R-5 is quashed and set aside. The respondents are directed to place the matter before the Service Committee to consider the representation of the petitioner for the ex-post-facto creation of post in question. This exercise shall be undertaken by the respondents within a period of eight weeks from today. With these directions, the petition is disposed of. “Copy dasti” (Rajiv Sharma), Judge. July 9, 2009. Bhupender