Judicial orders must be reasoned and non-cryptic; failure to do so contravenes the principles of natural justice.

JUDGMENT :

ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA, J.

1. This writ petition under Articles 226 & 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner praying for quashing the impugned order dated 11.08.2025 (Annexure-3) passed in Mutation Case No.10133/2025 by the Tahasildar, Cuttack (Opp. Party No.2).

2. Heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State-Opp. Parties.

3. It appears from the impugned order vide Annexure-3 that, the Mutation Case No.10133/2025 was filed by the petitioner on dated 05.07.2025 before the Tahasildar, Cuttack (Opp. Party No.2) praying for correction of the R.o.R of the case land to her name. Thereafter, the said Mutation Case No.10133/2025 was put up before the Tahasildar, Cuttack (Opp. Party No.2) on dated 08.07.2025. Then, the records of that Mutation Case No.10133/2025 was sent to the R.I. Khasmahal (East).

The R.I. Khasmahal (East) passed some orders on dated 06.08.2025 in that Mutation Case No.10133 of 2025 and fixed the date thereof to 07.08.2025.

Thereafter, surprisingly, on dated 11.08.2025 the Tahasildar, Cuttack (Opp. Party No.2) rejected to the Mutation Case No.10133/2025 of the petitioner passing a one line order and the said order is as follows:

11.08.2025

“The mutation is hereby rejected as per the R.I. report.”

Devdutt Pradhan.

Tahasildar, Cuttack

4. The above impugned order dated 11.08.2025 passed in Mutation Case No.10133/2025 by the Opp. Party No.2 is a cryptic and non-speaking order, in which, the independent mind of Tahasildar, Cuttack (Opp. Party No.2) has not been applied.

As per law, passing of any order by any Court or Authority like the above impugned order dated 11.08.2025 in Mutation Case No.10133 of 2025 by the Opp. Party No.2 without application of mind and without assigning any reason is against the principles of natural justice.

5. It is the settled propositions of law that, when any order is not supported by any reason and any order is passed without application of mind, the said order cannot be sustainable under law. Because as per law, such type of order is against the principles of natural justice.

On this aspect, the propositions of law has already been clarified in the ratio of the following decisions:

(i) In a case between Surendra Kumar Jain Vrs. Santo Bai and Another reported in 2025 INSC SC 230 para No.12 that, a cryptic judgment/order cannot be sustainable under law. Because, the same is an unreasoned and non-speaking order.

(ii) In a case between C. Sarvana Kumar Vrs. The Commissioner of Rural Development and Panchayatraj, Saidapet, Chennai and another decided in writ petition No.25723 of 2008 and M.P. No.2 of 2008 (Madras) Para No.5 (on 30.07.2021) that, the Act of passing of a cryptic order itself amount to violation of principles of natural justice.

(iii) In a case between Ramalingam Vs. Ranganan reported in AIR 2020 (NOC) 841 Madras that, a cryptic and non-speaking order is not sustainable under law.

(iv) In a case between Bar Council of Maharastra and Goa Vrs. Rajiv Naresh Chandra Narula and Others reported in 2025 (4) CCC 5 (SC) that, a cryptic order without referring the discussions and allegations would not satisfy requirements of a valid order.

(v) In a case between Sebastiani Lakra and Ors. Vrs. National Insurance Co. Ltd reported and another reported in 2018(4) CCC 50 (SC), every judicial order must contain reason. No judicial order is complete without reasons.

(vi) In a case between State of Rajasthan Vrs. Rajendra Prasad Jain reported in (2008)15 SCC 711, reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion, and without the same it becomes lifeless.

(vii) In a case between Atul Kuchhal Vrs. Hem Ram and another reported in 2015(1) CCC 640 (Rajas