The court reiterated that all judicial orders must include explicit reasoning to be valid, ensuring adherence to natural justice principles.

JUDGMENT

CM APPL. 7143/2022 (Early Hearing)

1. The present application has been filed under Section 151 CPC read with Section 4A and 25A of the Employee's Compensation Act, 1923 on behalf of the appellant seeking early hearing of the appeal.

2. Mr. Rakesh, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.1, and Ms. Archana Gaur, learned counsel appearing for respondent No.2, accept notice and fairly do not oppose the prayer made in the application.

3. In view of the averments made in the application and the no- objection given by the learned counsels for the respondents, the application is allowed and the date of hearing is preponed. Date fixed in the matter stands cancelled.

4. Application is disposed of.

FAO 78/2018

5. With the consent of the parties, the present appeal is taken up for hearing today itself.

6. By way of present appeal, the appellant (mother of the deceased) has assailed the order dated 09.11.2017 passed by the learned Employee Compensation Commissioner in Delhi Compensation Application No. WCD/74/NW/2017/1131-32. The appellant also seeks relief of complementary cost against the respondents.

7. Learned counsel for the appellant has contended that the impugned order has been passed in a cryptic manner and shows complete non- application of mind.

8. It is worthwhile to note that this Court, vide order dated 26.02.2018, had noted that the claim filed by the present appellant for compensation, on account of death of her son due to an accident during the course of his employment, was dismissed without referring to the facts or discussing as to how it was without jurisdiction.

9. The impugned order reads as follows:

"Smt. Kamla Devi Vs Jeet Singh & Ors.

9.11.2017 - For claimant: Sh. Ravi Prakash Clerk of AR

R-1, None

R -1, Ms. Neeru Garg

Arguments heard.

For want of jurisdiction the matter is dismissed.

Sd

09.11.2017

WCD/74/NW/17"

10. There is no gainsaying that reasons form the heart and soul of every order/pronouncement. Time and again, the Supreme Court has reiterated the importance of citing reasons in an order. To elucidate, in Secretary and Curator, Victoria Memorial Hall v. Howrah Ganatantrik Nagrik Samity and Others reported as (2010) 3 SCC 732, it was opined as follows:-

"40. It is a settled legal proposition that not only administrative but also a judicial order must be supported by reasons, recorded in it. Thus, while deciding an issue, the court is bound to give reasons for its conclusion. It is the duty and obligation on the part of the court to record reasons while disposing of the case. The hallmark of an order and exercise of judicial power by a judicial forum is to disclose its reasons by itself and giving of reasons has always been insisted upon as one of the fundamentals of sound administration of justice- delivery system, to make known that there had been proper and due application of mind to the issue before the court and also as an essential requisite of the principles of natural justice. "The giving of reasons for a decision is an essential attribute of judicial and judicious disposal of a matter before courts, and which is the only indication to know about the manner and quality of exercise undertaken, as also the fact that the court concerned had really applied its mind. " (Vide State of Orissa v. Dhaniram Luhar and State of Rajasthan v. Sohan Lal)

41. Reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion. It introduces clarity in an order and without the same, it becomes lifeless. Reasons substitute subjectivity by objectivity. Absence of reasons renders the order indefensible/unsustainable particularly when the order is subject to further challenge before a higher forum. (Vid