IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA CWP No. 3086 of 2009 Date of Decision: 06.05.2010 __________________________________________________________ Sh. Om Prakash. ….Petitioner. Versus Sh. Tej Ram and another. ….Respondents. ___________________________________________________________ Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dev Darshan Sud, J. Whether approved for reporting?1 __________________________________________________________ For the Petitioner: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Advocate. For the Respondent No. 1: Mr. Trilok Chauhan, Advocate. For the Respondent No. 2: Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Additional Advocate General, with Mr. R.P. Singh, Assistant Advocate General. __________________________________________________________ Dev Darshan Sud, J. (Oral) The petitioner is aggrieved by the order of Sub Divisional Magistrate affirming the appeal by the Deputy Commissioner, setting aside the election of the petitioner to the Panchyat accepting the objections raised by the respondent herein. 2. I am not entering into the merits of the submissions made by the learned counsel appearing for the parties for the reasons that I find that the appellate order has been passed in a most casual manner. The operative part of the order reads: 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 “I have perused the record of lower court and after hearing both the parties, I find no merits in the appeal because the present appellant has filled the nomination papers for the post of ward member from ward No. 5 Sanahar of Gram Panchyat, Kelodhar and from ward Kani Mandlah of Gram Panchyat, Mamail which is not in accordance with section 4 of the H.P. Panchayati Raj Act. The Sub- Divisional Officer (Civil), Karsog after discussing all issues passed a reasoned and legal order against the present appellant. In view of the observations made here-in-above, I uphold the order of ld. Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Karsog dated 16.12.208 passed in file No. 6/2006 titled as Tej Ram Vs. Om Prakash and the appeal is dismissed being without any merit. The stay granted is also vacated. A copy of this order be sent to the Director, Panchayati Raj, Himachal Pradesh, Shimla. The lower court record alongwith copy of this order be also sent to the Sub-Divisional Officer (Civil), Karsog. The appeal file of this court be consigned to the General Record Room after due completion.” This is not the manner of exercising appellate jurisdiction. Where number of grounds has been raised by the petitioner herein, the statutory authority was bound to have decided them unless those grounds have either been abandoned or no arguments have been advanced in support of those grounds. The appellate order is a non speaking order and no reasons have been assigned as to how the appellate authority has arrived at the conclusions therein. The order Annexure P-5 is accordingly quashed and set aside. The Deputy Commissioner, Mandi is directed to decide the appeal preferred by the petitioner afresh in accordance with law. For this purpose, the parties shall appear before the Deputy Commissioner, 3 Mandi on 15th May, 2010. The Deputy Commissioner, Mandi is directed to decide the appeal on or before 30th June, 2010. This Writ Petition is disposed of. All interim order (s) shall stand vacated. There shall be no order as to costs. May 06, 2010 (Dev Darshan Sud), (KRS) Judge