3] The petitioner has also raised certain objections touching merits of the decision, however, at this stage, since we deem it appropriate to refer the matter back to the scrutiny committee and do not propose to go into merits of contentions raised by the petitioner. We have called for the original record of enquiry conducted by scrutiny committee and on perusal of the record it is observed that report of the vigilance cell is not satisfactory. The vigilance cell has not conducted proper enquiry and as such, it would be unsafe to act upon the said report. The scrutiny committee also did not record reasons in support of the decision of issuance of validation certificate in favour of respondent no.5. It is well established that the decision taken by the scrutiny committee needs to be supported by reasons howsoever brief it may be. In the instant matter as no reasons are recorded, we deem it proper to remit the matter back for reconsideration to the scrutiny committee. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no.5 objects to entertainability of the petition on the ground that the petitioner has approached this Court late and the delay occurred has not been satisfactorily explained. It does appear that the respondent no.5 has been issued validation certificate in the month of July, 2013 and the instant petition is presented after receiving necessary documents by the petitioner in the month of January 2014. We do not find any merit in the contentions raised
