SCA/3923/2008 1/4 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3923 of 2008 With SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 3924 of 2008 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= SHREE KATHVA TELIBIYA UTPATHAK SAHAKARI MANDALI LTD - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR SHIRISH JOSHI for Petitioner(s) : 1, MR SHUKLA, AGP for Respondent(s) : 1, None for Respondent(s) : 2 - 3. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL Date : 03/03/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. Rule. Mr.Shukla, learned AGP waives service of SCA/3923/2008 2/4 JUDGMENT notice of rule for the respondent authorities. With the consent of the learned Counsel appearing for both the sides, the matter is finally heard today. 2. The petitioner has preferred the petitions for challenging the legality and validity of the order passed by the State Government in purported exercise of the power under Section 155 of the Gujarat Cooperative Societies Act, whereby the revision has been dismissed. 3. Heard Mr.Joshi, learned Counsel for the petitioner and Mr.Shukla, learned AGP for the respondent State Authorities. 4. Upon hearing the learned advocate appearing for both the sides including the AGP, it is apparent that no reasons whatsoever are stated by the State Government who has passed the order, except stating that the submissions are considered, record of the lower Court is examined and no case is made out for interference. The order is ex facie without recording the reasons which has weighed to the authority for rejection of the revision application. SCA/3923/2008 3/4 JUDGMENT 5. It deserves to be recorded that in the present case, the State Government has not exercised administrative power, but has exercised quasi judicial power. When the power is exercised by the quasi judicial authority, the principles of natural justice demands that if not elaborative, but the reasons which weighed to the authorities for passing the final order must be stated. The aforesaid recording of the reasons would also help the higher forum to undertake the judicial scrutiny, if ultimately, challenged. Unless the reasons are recorded, it may not be possible for the higher authority or the higher forum to know the grounds on the basis of which the final order has been passed by the quasi judicial authority. Therefore, it is expected and required for the quasi judicial authority which is the State Government in the present case to record the reasons and then to pass the order. As no reasons whatsoever are mentioned, the order being non-speaking order, the same cannot sustain in the eye of law. 6. In view of the above, the impugned order passed by the State Government is quashed and set aside with the further directions to the State SCA/3923/2008 4/4 JUDGMENT Government that the revision shall stand restored to the file of the State Government and after giving opportunity of hearing to both the sides and after recording reasons, appropriate orders shall be passed in accordance with law, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of the order of this Court. 7. The petition is allowed to the aforesaid extent. Rule made absolute accordingly. No order as to costs. Direct service is permitted. 3.3.2008 (Jayant Patel, J.) vinod