Summary
The Supreme Court set aside a Division Bench judgment of the Allahabad High Court that had affirmed a Single Judge's decision in a batch of writ petitions without giving any reasons of its own, holding that an unreasoned judgment cannot be sustained, and restored the intra-court appeal for fresh hearing with liberty to place subsequent developments on record.
Issues
- Whether a Division Bench judgment in an intra-court appeal that merely records the parties' cases and the Single Judge's findings and states its agreement, without reasons, can be sustained.
Held
- The Division Bench had only set out the parties' cases and the Single Judge's findings and concluded that it agreed with them, without expressing its own view on the issues or dealing with the Government Orders placed before it; a judgment lacking any reasoning cannot be sustained. (¶¶ 1, 2, 3)
- Relying on CCT v. Shukla & Bros., the Court reiterated that courts must give their own reasons, however concise, for rejecting a party's claim whether at admission or after regular hearing, since reasons enable the party to challenge the order and the appellate court to review it. (¶ 3)
- On remand, the parties may argue law and facts afresh and place subsequent Government Orders and other developments on record so that the Division Bench can take an objective view; the interim orders of the Supreme Court continue until the appeal is decided, with liberty to seek their modification or vacation. (¶¶ 4, 5, 6)
Result
Appeal disposed of; impugned judgment quashed and the special appeal restored before the Division Bench, parties to appear before the Roster Bench on 20/09/2024; interim orders of this Court to continue; High Court requested to expedite; intervenors given liberty to participate.