Court No. - 38 Case :- WRIT - A No. - 45261 of 2010 Petitioner :- Usha Devi Respondent :- State Of U.P. And Others Petitioner Counsel :- Kalp Nath Bind Respondent Counsel :- C. S. C. Hon'ble Shishir Kumar,J.
Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Standing
Counsel.
Petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 29th April, 2010, by
which the petitioner’s appointment for the post of Aanganwari
Karyakatri has been terminated only on the ground that she has
submitted a forged certificate of Intermediate.
It appears that on the basis of some complaint, the enquiry was
made and it was found that the forged certificate showing that the
petitioner has passed 2nd division Intermediate has been placed
before the authority concerned an enquiry to that effect was made
and according to the respondents it was found that the forged
certificate has been submitted showing that petitioner has passed
the Intermediate Examination in second class though the petitioner
has passed Intermediate examination in 3rd division. A show cause
notice was given, to which the petitioner submitted her reply.
Petitioner has denied that she has not submitted any marksheet or
certificate of Intermediate. In case some certificate is on record,
that cannot be taken into consideration to have been submitted by
the petitioner. According to the petitioner, without considering the
reply of the petitioner the order dated 29th April, 2010 has been
passed without assigning any reason and without discussing the
claim of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, four lines order
has been passed without assigning any reason, therefore, there is
clear presumption that authority at that time of passing the order
has not applied its mind. It is settled in law that the Administrative
authority while considering the claim of the person has to record
reasons, if no reason has been recorded it will be presumed that
order has been passed without application of mind.
I have considered the submission of the petitioner and learned
Standing Counsel. Learned Standing Counsel is also not in a
position to justify the reasonings given in the order impugned. In
such circumstances, I am of the opinion that without inviting
counter and rejoinder affidavits, this writ petition can be decided
as ultimately result of counter and rejoinder affidavit will be the
same.Therefore, with the consent of the parties the writ petition is
disposed of finally.
I have perused the order impugned and found that while passing
the order, the respondent has not recorded any reason while
dismissing the claim of the petitioner. It is settled law, in view of
the decision of Constitution Bench of the Apex Court, reported in
AIR 1990 S.C. 1984, S. N. Mukherji versus Union of India,
which held that the Administrative authorities are also bound to
record the reasons while passing an order. If no reason has been
recorded it will be treated to be an order of non application of
mind. From the perusal of the order it appears that the four lines
order in a crepting manner has been passed, therefore, in my
opinion that the order impugned cannot be sustained as such is
hereby quashed.
The writ petition is allowed and the order dated 29.04.2010
annexure-9 to the writ petition is hereby quashed and the matter is
remanded back to the respondent No. 3 to pass a reasoned order
after according to law after giving full opportunity to the petitioner
within a period of two months from the date of production of a
certified copy of this order.
The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.
No order as to costs.
Order Date :- 4.8.2010
Sazia