Allowed¶6

Charanjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Punjab & Haryana HC20 Mar 2025CWP/7869/2025

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Non-speaking appellate order rejecting statutory disciplinary appeal set aside; duty to give reasons — natural justice, due process; Kranti Associates v. Masood Ahmed Khan 2010 (9) SCC 496 relied on; Punjab & Haryana High Court; Appellate Authority remanded to pass reasoned order within 4 months after hearing; CWP-7869-2025 & CWP-7888-2025 (O&M); Charanjit Singh; Mukesh Kumar Bhatia; State of Punjab.

What did the court decide?

Impugned Appellate Authority order dated 24.07.2024 set aside; Appellate Authority to reconsider the appeal afresh in accordance with law and pass a reasoned order within 4 months after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing. ¶6

Charanjit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Others — Punjab & Haryana HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶6

Issue for consideration

Whether the statutory appeal could validly be rejected by the Appellate Authority through a non-speaking order, notwithstanding the numerous grounds raised therein.

¶3

Court's answer

A perfunctory, mono-linear disposition bereft of proper contemplation of the facts and circumstances of a case stands in brazen contravention of principles of natural justice.

¶4

Ratio / Principle

Administrative authorities are mandated to articulate the rationale behind their decisions, ensuring transparency and fairness in the decision-making process, which assists the Court in scrutinising the case and prevents a revolving door of appeals.

¶6

Key takeaways

The impugned appellate order dated 24.07.2024 is set aside; the Appellate Authority is directed to consider the matter afresh in accordance with law, taking note of the grounds taken in the appeal, and to pass a reasoned order within 4 months after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing.ratio¶6

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh (Aman Chaudhary, J., oral), decided 20.03.2025 — CWP-7869-2025 (O&M) (Charanjit Singh) and CWP-7888-2025 (O&M) (Mukesh Kumar Bhatia) vs. State of Punjab and others, involving similar issues, disposed of together. Petitioners sought quashing of a chargesheet dated 28.09.2020, inquiry report dated 13.06.2022, punishment order dated 08.06.2023 and the Appellate Authority's order dated 24.07.2024, which rejected their statutory appeals as a non-speaking order despite numerous grounds raised. Relying on M/s Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. v. Masood Ahmed Khan, 2010 (9) SCC 496, the Court held that a perfunctory, mono-linear disposition bereft of contemplation of facts and circumstances contravenes principles of natural justice; orders affecting rights must speak, reasons being the essence and part of due process, and administrative authorities must articulate their rationale to ensure transparency and fairness, aid scrutiny and prevent a revolving door of appeals. The impugned appellate order was set aside; the Appellate Authority was directed to reconsider the matter afresh in accordance with law, take note of the grounds taken in appeal, and pass a reasoned order within 4 months after affording an opportunity of hearing.

¶1

CWP-7869-202 5 (O&M) CWP-7888-202 5 (O&M)

¶2

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH 148, 149 Da t e of decision: 20.03.2025 CWP-7869-202 5 (O&M) Charanjit Singh v s. State of Punjab and others

¶4

CWP-7888-202 5 (O&M) Mukesh Kumar B hatia vs. State of Punjab and o t hers

¶5

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMAN CHAUDHARY

¶6

¶7

Present : Mr. Gaurav Rana, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶8

Mr. Charanpreet Singh, AAG, Punj a b. *********

¶9

AMAN CHAUDHARY, J. (ORAL)

¶10

1. Th e se cases involve similar iss u es and therefore, are being

¶11

disposed of toge t her.

¶12

2. Pra y er made in the present petitions is for quashing the chargesheet dated 28. 0 9.2020, inquiry report dated 13.06.2022, punishment order dated 08.06.20 2 3 and order passed by th e Appellate Authority dated 24.07.2024.

¶13

3. Le a rned counsel submits that p e titioner had raised numerous grounds in the s t atutory appeal filed, however, i t has been rejected by passing a non-speaking or d er.

¶14

4. A perfunctory, mono-linear disposition, bereft of proper contemplation o f facts and circumstances o f a case, stands in brazen contravention o f principles of natural justice , as eloquently expounded by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in M/s Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. And Another vs. Masood Ahmed Khan and Others , 201 0 (9) SCC 496, wherein it was

¶15

ASHOK KUMAR 2025.03.24 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

¶16

CWP-7869-202 5 (O&M) CWP-7888-202 5 (O&M)

¶17

¶18

observed that the face of an order passed by a quasi-judicial or administrative authority affecti n g the rights of parties, must s peak and must not be like the inscrutable face of a Sphinx. The authorities are under a legal obligation to give reasons while p a ssing an order, which are the es s ence and virtually a part of the due process.

¶19

5. Ad m inistrative authorities are man d ated to articulate the rationale behind their decisions, ensuring transparency and fairness in the decisionmaking process , which not only assists the C ourt in scrutinising the case effectively but p r events a revolving door of app e als to the same institution. 6. As a fall out of the above, the imp u gned order dated 24.07.2024 is set aside and th e Appellate Authority is directe d to consider the matter afresh, in accordance with law, taking note of the grou n ds taken in appeal filed by the petitioner and p ass a reasoned order, within a period of 4 months, after affording an op p ortunity of hearing to him.

¶20

7. Dis p osed of accordingly.

¶21

Ph o tocopy of this order be placed o n the connected file.

¶22

20.03.2025	(AMAN CHAUDHARY)
ashok	JUDGE
Wh ether speaking	: Yes/No
Wh ether reportable	: Yes/No

¶23

ASHOK KUMAR 2025.03.24 16:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Charanjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Charanjit Singh v. State of Punjab and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sandeep Pal Singh Bhullar Vs State of Punjab and Another

Jiwan Asha Vs State of Punjab

Kuldeep Singh Vs State of Punjab and Ors.

Karamjit Kaur Vs State of Punjab and Others

Baljit Singh Vs State of Punjab and Another

Nazeera Vs State of Punjab and Others