CIVIL WRIT JURISDICTION CASE No.8154 OF 1994 In the matter of an application under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India. ------------ 1. GUPTESHWAR PRASAD.@ GUPTESHWAR NONIA S/O LATE HARI NONIA 2. NARAYAN PRASAD @ NARAYAN NONIA S/O LATE KANHAIYA NONIA 3. JAMUNA PRASAD @ JAMUNA NONIA S/O LATE RAM BRIKSH NONIA 4. LAKSHMI RAM @ LAKSHMI NONIA S/O LATE RAM CHARITAR NONIA 5. CHIRANJEE NONIA S/O LATE RAM CHARITAR NONIA 6. HARDUWAR NONIA S/O BALDEO NONIA, ALL R/O VILLAGE & P.O. KUKUNDHA,PS.ITARAHI,DISTT.-BHOJPUR(ARRAH)---PETITIONERS Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR THROUGH THE COLLECTOR,BUXAR 2. THE CIRCLE OFFICER, ITARAHI ANCHAL ITARAHI,DISTT-BHOJPUR 3. BHALU DHOBI S/O NITHALI DHOBI @ RAM BRIKSH DHOBI, R/O VILLAGE & P.O.KUKURDHA,PS. ITARAHI,DISTT.-BHOJPUR-- RESPONDENTS ------------- FOR The Petitioners : ANIL KUMAR SINHA, ADVOCATE For The Respondents :(GP2) ------------ P R E S E N T THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR TRIPATHI A.K.Tripathi,J On an application made by respondent no. 3 before the Circle Officer, Itarahi, District- Bhojpur (Arrah) under the Bihar Privileged Persons Homestead Tenancy Act, 1947, the Circle Officer in a cryptic order contained in annexure-6 dated 29.6.1990 directed issuance of Basgit Purcha in favour of the private respondent to the extent of one decimal of land. This order was supposed to be passed on the report of the revenue authority. Since no reason as such was assigned in the impugned order the petitioners decided to file a writ application and challenge the same but the High Court in its wisdom directed the petitioners to withdraw the writ application with liberty to approach the Collector, Bhojpur with an application under section 21 of the Act because he was the statutory authority in this regard. But the reason for which the - 2 - petitioners were relegated to the Collector has been totally belied. It is opinion of this Court that the petitioners were relegated to the Collector with the hope that the superior authority will apply himself to the issue and render an opinion by an order which provides and furnishes material which compelled the authority to reach the conclusion of the kind. Unfortunately for this Court the cryptic order does not disclose as to what weighed with the Collector in rejecting the claim of the petitioners. It is in this connection the petitioners have again knocked the door of the High Court. The Court is concerned in the perfunctory manner in which the issue has been decided both by Circle Officer as well as the Collector specially when these orders have been rendered under a statute which has vested power upon the two authorities. The orders are not administrative orders but are quasi judicial in nature. Orders have civil consequence for the parties. In such matters, the Courts have always been of the opinion that decision of the kind rendered must disclose the material or reason which compelled the authority to reach such a conclusion. If the decision do not contain reason or the material then the superior authority or even the Court of law have difficulty in judging the correctness or otherwise of such a decision rendered in the matter. Since both the orders contained in annexures 6 and 9 are the non-speaking kind and the Court cannot make out as to what was the material under consideration for reaching the decision in the matter. It is left with no option but to quash annexures- 6 and 9. This writ application is allowed and the matter is - 3 - remanded back to the Circle Officer, Itarahi, District- Bhojpur for rendering a proper decision after due consideration of the materials in this regard. However, there will be no order as to cost. Patna High Court, Patna, Dated the 11th November, 2008 NAFR/RPS/Sr.Secy. ( Ajay Kumar Tripathi,J.)