2024 (8) TMI 1678 - SC - Indian Laws

Requirement for Reasoned Judicial Orders: absence of reasons led to quash, remand for fresh hearing and interim relief retained

Requirement for reasoned judicial decisions was reaffirmed: absence of reasoning rendered the impugned judgment unsustainable and resulted in quashing. ... Reasoned judgment - requirement to record reasons - quashing for lack of reasons - remand for fresh consideration - restoration of appeal - continuance of interim orders - liberty to place subsequent developments - impleadment and participation of intervenors - HELD THAT:- We are of the opinion that in the absence of any reasoning in the impugned judgment, the same cannot be sustained. In this regard, we are benefitted by the following observations made by this Court in CCT v. Shukla & Bros [2010 (4) TMI 139 - SUPREME COURT] The matter is remanded back to the Division Bench for the parties to appear and address arguments afresh. Liberty is granted to the parties to place on record the subsequent developments in the matter so that the Division Bench is apprised of the larger perspective in the case and take an objective view in the matter. Liberty is granted to both sides to address arguments on law as also on facts afresh by additionally referring to the subsequent developments, if any besides the issues raised before the Division Bench in the light of the common judgment passed by the learned Single Judge. Accordingly, the impugned judgment is quashed and set aside and the appeal filed by the appellant in the High Court is restored to its original position. The parties are directed to appear before the Roster Bench on 20th September, 2024. The interim orders passed by this Court shall continue to operate till the appeal is disposed of by the Division Bench. Appeal is disposed of along with pending application(s), if any. Issues: Whether the Division Bench's judgment which merely records agreement with the Single Judge without giving independent reasons is sustainable.Analysis: The Court examined the absence of any independent reasoning in the Division Bench judgment and relied on established principles that courts and tribunals are obliged to record reasons for their decisions. The judgment referred to precedent emphasising that reasons are essential for transparency, effective appellate review and public confidence. Given that the Division Bench did not apply its mind to subsequent Government Orders and developments placed before it, the matter required fresh consideration by a reasoned Bench. Consequently, the Supreme Court remanded the matter to the Division Bench for fresh hearing allowing parties to place subsequent developments on record and to address law and facts afresh; interim orders of this Court were continued until final disposal.Conclusion: The impugned Division Bench judgment is quashed and set aside; the appeal is restored to its original position and remitted to the Division Bench for fresh hearing with liberty to parties to place subsequent developments on record. The interim orders passed by this Court shall continue to operate until the appeal is disposed of.