conclusion that the certificates obtained by the petitioner, her brother and sister are bogus was not appearing to be based on any other positive probabilities arising out of the material on record. While accepting the recommendations of the District Level Scrutiny Committee, the District Collector obviously did not give notice to or hear the petitioner and in appeal, G.O.Ms.No.42, Social Welfare (CV.2) Department, dated 24-05-2004, after referring to the factual background for the appeal, the order merely stated about the petitioner and her counsel not availing the sufficient opportunity in time though given to the petitioner and straight away the appeal was rejected without any detailed reference to the grounds of appeal. Even in the review petition, the petitioner contended that the verification by an Inspector of Police, the enquiry report of the Revenue Department etc., did not form the material before the Scrutiny Committee or the Collector and the issuance of certificates by various officials and nonofficials was ignored notwithstanding the various instructions of the Government itself. The records relating to the petitioner’s father were claimed to have been ignored and even the burden of proof is wrongly placed on the petitioner. These grounds raised in the review petition were not even remotely referred to in the impugned memo, which repeated in paragraphs 1 to 4 whatever was recorded in the appellate order. The review petition was then stated to have been examined and rejected as there is no merit. An order, which affects the civil rights of the petitioner as the final result of a quasi-judicial examination could not have been justified by such a laconic expression of “absence of merit” and therefore, the matter deserves to be remitted back to the 1st respondent for reconsideration and disposal on merits in accordance with law. The learned Government Pleader for Social Welfare attempted to
