2021 (3) TMI 1421

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.....2020 is not satisfactory and therefore, passed the order of debarment for a period of six months. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner pressed various ground to assail the impugned action and order including the ground that without the petitioner was put to show cause notice on 16.10.2020 Annexure P/9, the petitioner filed a detailed reply dated 19.10.2020 Annexure P/10. The respondent despite receiving the said reply did not consider the defense taken in the said reply and jumped to a conclusion that the said reply "is not satisfactory". No reasons are assigned as to why the said conclusion was drawn that the reply is not satisfactory. In absence of reasons, in view of judgment of Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Kranti As....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... and Judicial orders. The principles are summarized in para no.47, which reads as under:- "47. Summarising the above discussion, this Court holds:- (a) In India, the judicial trend has always been to record reasons, even in administrative decisions, if such decisions affect anyone prejudicially. (b) A quasi-judicial authority must record reasons in support of its conclusions. (c) Insistence on recording of reasons is meant to serve the wider principle of justice that justice must not only be done it must also appear to be done as well. (d) Recording of reasons also operates as a valid restraint on any possible arbitrary exercise of judicial and quasijudicial or even administrative power. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt, clear and succinct. A pretence of reasons or `rubber-stamp reasons' is not to be equated with a valid decision making process. (m) It cannot be doubted that transparency is the sine qua non of restraint on abuse of judicial powers. Transparency in decision making not only makes the judges and decision makers less prone to errors but also makes them subject to broader scrutiny. (See David Shapiro in Defence of Judicial Candor (1987) 100 Harward Law Review 731-737). (n) Since the requirement to record reasons emanates from the broad doctrine of fairness in decision making, the said requirement is now virtually a component of human rights and was considered part of Strasbourg Jurisprudence. See (1994) 19 EHRR 553, at ....