Reasoned quasi-judicial orders are mandatory; unexplained dismissal was set aside and remanded for a fresh speaking decision.

A quasi-judicial order must disclose reasons showing how the facts were assessed and the legal principles applied; mere reproduction of submissions and precedent is insufficient. Where the Tribunal failed to explain its treatment of the allegations and the statutory charges, the decision did not amount to a speaking order and could not be properly reviewed. The order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh hearing and a reasoned decision.

---

---

Issues: Whether the Tribunal's order dismissing the appeal without giving reasons could be sustained, and whether the matter required remand for a fresh decision with reasons.

Analysis: The Tribunal's order reproduced submissions and referred to precedent, but it did not explain how the facts were marshalled or how the legal principles were applied to the case. A judicial or quasi-judicial decision must disclose reasons so that the parties know why their contentions were accepted or rejected. Absence of a reasoned finding, especially on the allegation of clandestine activities and the charges under Sections 9(1)(b) and 9(1)(d), meant that the order did not satisfy the requirement of a speaking decision and could not be properly scrutinised.

Conclusion: The Tribunal's order was set aside and the matter was remanded for fresh hearing and a reasoned decision.

---