VIJAY SINGH KUSHWAH Vs. STATE OF M.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON the joint request, matters are analogously heard and decided by this common order.

(2.) SHRI D.P. Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioners were served with a show cause notice. In turn, they submitted their reply. Neither any enquiry was conducted nor any personal hearing was given to them. The impugned order is passed without assigning any reason on the reply of the petitioner. He submits that in similar matter in WP No. 6642/2011 this Court has set aside the similar order for violating the principle of natural justice.

(3.) THE impugned order shows that show cause notice was given to the petitioners. In turn, the petitioners submitted their reply. In the impugned order, it is mentioned that petitioners reply were not found to be satisfactory. However, before recording the said "conclusion" that reply is not satisfactory, no "reasons" are assigned. Reasons are heart beat of conclusions. Assigning reason is part of "due process". The impugned order resulted into termination of the petitioners and therefore, it was necessary for the respondents to act in accordance with principle of natural justice. The Apex Court in the case of Kranti Associates Private Limited v. Masood Ahmed Khan, : (2010) 9 SCC 496 has emphasized the need for assigning reasons in judicial, quasi -judicial and administrative proceedings. The relevant portion of the said judgment reads as under: -