SCA/9926/2003 1/3 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD SPECIAL CIVIL APPLICATION No. 9926 of 2003 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 ? ========================================================= PRANTIJ TALUKA EDUCATION SOCIETY THRO.SECRETRY & 1 - Petitioner(s) Versus STATE OF GUJARAT & 2 - Respondent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR NIRZAR S DESAI for Petitioner(s) : 1 - 2. GOVERNMENT PLEADER for Respondent(s) : 1 - 3. ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE JAYANT PATEL Date : 25/04/2008 ORAL JUDGMENT 1. The only contention deserves to be considered in the present petition is as to whether the State SCA/9926/2003 2/3 JUDGMENT Government is required to record the reasons for declining to grant the permission to convert the School from Vocational Stream to General Stream for Standards 11 and 12 or not. 2. The facts, as such, so far as the application of the petitioner and its consideration by the State Government, are not in dispute. The impugned order Annexure “A” passed by the State Government is without recording any reasons whatsoever and it can be said as absolutely a non-speaking order. It is true that the exercise of the power by the State Government in the present case is not as that of quasi judicial authority, but even if it is considered being an administrative order, it must reflect the application of mind by the State Government, which may enable this Court to undertake the judicial scrutiny. What is only mentioned in the order is that after careful consideration, the application is not accepted. Such an order passed by the State Government without recording any reasons whatsoever, which had weighed to the State Government for rejecting the application SCA/9926/2003 3/3 JUDGMENT would not be sustained in the eye of law. 3. Hence, the impugned order Annexure A is quashed and set aside with the direction that the application of the petitioner shall be reconsidered by the State Government in light of the observations made by this Court and if required after giving opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, afresh order shall be passed by the State Government. Until the decision is taken by the State Government and the same is communicated to the petitioner by Registered A.D. Post, the interim relief granted pending the petition shall continue to remain in operation. 4. Rule made absolute accordingly. There shall be no order as to costs. After the decision of the State Government, it will be open to the petitioner to move appropriate application for apportionment or withdrawal of the amount deposited, as the case may be. 25.4.2008 (Jayant Patel, J.) vinod