Reasoned Decision-Making is the Backbone of Administrative Law: Punjab and Haryana HC Sets Aside Non-Speaking Order
In a recent judgment emphasizing the significance of reasoned decision-making in administrative law, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, led by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikas Bahl, quashed a non-speaking order issued by respondent No. 2, the Punjab Education Development Board. This decision reaffirms the court’s dedication to the principles of natural justice and the necessity for transparency in decision-making processes.
The Sukh Sagar Avenue Welfare Association, through a writ petition under Article 226/227 of the Constitution of India, challenged the validity of an office order and show-cause notice issued by the respondent. The petitioner argued that the impugned order lacked proper reasoning, failing to reflect an application of mind and violating the principles of natural justice.
The crux of the matter lay in the non-speaking nature of the order issued by respondent No. 2, which cancelled an agreement involving the running of three schools. The petitioner’s contention was that this order did not demonstrate any reasoned application, an essential element in fair decision-making. Respondent No. 2, during the proceedings, acknowledged the need for a speaking order and agreed to reconsider the matter.
Justice Vikas Bahl’s judgment highlighted several precedents underscoring the obligation of quasi-judicial and administrative authorities to provide reasons in their decisions. Citing judgments from the Supreme Court and previous High Court rulings, the Court observed:
“A reasoned decision is the lifeblood of fairness in the administrative process and facilitates judicial scrutiny, upholding the litigants’ faith in the justice delivery system.”
The Court pinpointed the inadequacies in the impugned order, noting its verbatim repetition from a previous order and lack of specific findings against the petitioner’s responses. The absence of reasons in the order was deemed contrary to the established principles of law.
The Court set aside the impugned order, directing respondent No. 2 to pass a new speaking order considering the petitioner’s replies. Additionally, the Court ordered the release of bona fide pending payments within a specified period and maintained the status quo until the fresh order’s issuance.
Date of Decision: 13.02.2024
Sukh Sagar Avenue Welfare Association VS Punjab Education Development Board and others
