Bachchuram Ramswaroop Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

Bachchuram Ramswaroop Singh vs State of U.P. and 2 Others — Allahabad HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Order dated 17.03.2025 passed by respondent no. 3 and order dated 25.04.2025 passed in Writ - C No. 12602 of 2025 set aside; respondent left free to pass a fresh order pursuant to the show cause notice after affording the appellant an opportunity of hearing in accordance with law.

Issue for consideration

Whether an order dated 17.03.2025 found to have been passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and containing no reasons should have been set aside by the Single Judge, rather than the appellant being directed to make a representation against it.

Court's answer

Since the Single Judge concluded that order dated 17.03.2025 was passed in violation of the principles of natural justice and the order contains no reason despite the appellant's reply to the show cause notice, the order was required to be set aside; directing a representation qua such an order would amount to ordering a post-decisional hearing, which cannot be countenanced.

Ratio / Principle

The appeal is allowed; the order dated 17.03.2025 passed by respondent no. 3 and the order dated 25.04.2025 passed in Writ - C No. 12602 of 2025 are set aside.

Key takeaways

The respondent is free to pass a fresh order pursuant to the show cause notice issued to the appellant (whose response has already been filed), after providing the appellant an opportunity of hearing in accordance with law.ratio¶14

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

Division Bench (Arun Bhansali, CJ and Kshitij Shailendra, J) of the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad allowed Special Appeal No. 410 of 2025 against a Single Judge's order dated 25.04.2025 in Writ - C No. 12602 of 2025. The Single Judge, while finding that order dated 17.03.2025 passed by respondent no. 3 - which cast aspersions of mass copying on the petitioner-college without affording it any opportunity of hearing - violated the principles of natural justice and contained no reasons despite the appellant's reply to the show cause notice, had not set it aside but directed the appellant to file a detailed representation and the respondent to decide it after hearing, leaving the 17.03.2025 order to abide by that decision. Holding that such an order was required to be set aside and that directing a representation qua an order passed in violation of natural justice and without reason amounted to an impermissible post-decisional hearing, the Division Bench set aside both the order dated 17.03.2025 and the Single Judge's order, leaving the respondent free to pass a fresh order pursuant to the show cause notice after providing the appellant an opportunity of hearing in accordance with law.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74577-DB

Chief Justice's Court

Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 410 of 2025

Appellant :- Bachchuram Ramswaroop Singh Mahavidyalaya Respondent :- State of U.P. and 2 others Counsel for Appellant :- Gaurabh Srivastava,Vikrant Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- Meenakshi Singh, A.C.S.C.,Pratik Chandra

Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J.

This appeal is directed against order dated 25.04.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ - C No. 12602 of 2025 whereby while disposing of the writ petition filed by the petitioner/appellant against order dated 17.03.2025, the appellant has been directed to file a detailed representation against order dated 17.03.2025 and respondent has been directed to decide the same after affording opportunity of hearing. Whereafter, direction has been given that the order dated 17.03.2025, which was impugned in the writ petition, shall abide by the order to be passed by the respondent no. 3 on the representation of the petitioner/appellant.

Learned counsel for the appellant made submissions that learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the order impugned dated 17.03.2025 revealed that the appellant was not afforded any opportunity of hearing by the respondent no. 3 before passing the order impugned, the order cast aspersions and serious allegations against the petitioner-college by alleging that the petitioner-college was involved in mass copying, however, despite such finding, the order has not been set aside and direction has been given to make a representation qua the said unreasoned order and therefore, the order impugned deserves to be quashed and set aside.

Further submission has been made that in identical nature writ

petition against the same nature order passed by respondent no. 3, in Writ - C No. 11373 of 2025, a co-ordinate Bench had set aside the order and left it free for the respondent to pass a fresh order, however, the said order was not followed by learned Single Judge.

Learned counsel for the respondents attempted to support the order impugned by indicating that now opportunity would be provided to the petitioner/appellant.

We have considered the submission made by counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record.

The petition was filed questioning the validity of order dated 17.03.2025. Once learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the same was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and a bare look at the said order also reveals that the same does not contain any reason despite the fact that the appellant has filed reply to the said show cause notice, the order was required to be set aside. The direction given to make a representation qua an order, which was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and did not contain any reason, would essentially amount to order a post decisional hearing, which cannot be countenanced.

Consequently, the appeal is allowed . The order dated 17.03.2025 passed by respondent no. 3 and order dated 25.04.2025 passed in Writ - C No. 12602 of 2025 are set aside.

The respondent would be free to pass a fresh order pursuant to the show cause notice issued to the petitioner/appellant, response thereof has already been filed, after providing opportunity of hearing to the appellant in accordance with law.

Order Date :- 8.5.2025 nd

(Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ)

Digitally signed by :- NISITH DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad