Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
ANANDA CHANDRA BEHERA
Sri Sri Dakhinakali SHG, represented through its Secretary – Appellant
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner's challenge to name removal. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. hearing held for petitioner and state. (Para 3) |
| 3. non-speaking orders violate natural justice. (Para 4) |
| 4. validity of decisions based on reason. (Para 5) |
| 5. writ petition allowed; name reinstated. (Para 6 , 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
JUDGMENT :
1. This writ petition under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India, 1950 has been filed by the petitioner- WSHG praying for quashing the removal of the name of the petitioner-WSHG for procuring paddy for KMS 2025-26 from the Office Order/letter No.80/Judicial/MS/2026 dated 19.01.2026 under Annexure-7 passed/issued by the Collector & District Magistrate, Ganjam (Opp. Party No.2) and to direct the Opp. Party No.2 for the inclusion/insertion of the name of the petitioner WSHG in that Annexure-7 as a paddy procurement agency for KMS 2025-26 and to pass such other order(s) in favour of the petitioner.
3. I have already heard from the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Addl. Standing Counsel for the State.
It is the settled propositions of law that, when any order is not backed/supported by any reason, then the said order is to be termed as a non-speaking order. T
Administrative orders must provide reasons for decisions that affect rights, or they are invalid under natural justice principles.
An administrative order lacking substantiation through reasons is considered non-speaking and cannot withstand legal scrutiny as it violates principles of natural justice.
An administrative decision must be substantiated with reasons; orders lacking reasoning are invalid and violate natural justice principles.
Administrative orders must be supported by reasons; failure to do so violates principles of natural justice, rendering such orders invalid.
Exclusion of a party from a procurement process without a hearing violates principles of natural justice and renders the action illegal.
Exclusion from administrative decisions must comply with natural justice, ensuring the affected party is given a fair chance to respond before adverse actions are taken.
The exclusion of a party from procurement proceedings without a fair opportunity to be heard violates principles of natural justice, and any prior rights must be respected.
Authority must comply with the principles of natural justice by providing an opportunity to be heard before making adverse decisions affecting rights previously established.
Exclusion from government procurement processes without providing a fair hearing violates principles of natural justice, necessitating reconsideration of such administrative decisions.
Exclusion from administrative benefits without a hearing violates principles of natural justice and is deemed arbitrary, especially when rights have been established.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
