NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.762  OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) NO. 16258 of 2004)

Ram Phal                                                                  ……..  Appellant

Versus

The State of Haryana & Ors.                                    ……..Respondents

O R D E R

Leave granted in the special leave petition.

1) The facts in nutshell are as follows; the appellant who was  working

as a constable, was before the Writ Court, inter alia requesting the court, to

direct  the  respondents  to  grant  salary  for  the  periods  18.9.2001  to

31.09.2001, 01.02.2002 to 28.02.2002 and 01.07.2002 to upto the date of

filing of the petition with interest at the rate of 18 per cent per annum and

1

further to direct the respondents to revise the pay of appellant after granting

the increments with effect from 18.09.2001 and for making the payment of

arrears after refixation with 18% interest per annum.    

2) The Writ Court after entertaining the petition had issued the notices

to the respondents.  

3) After  service  of  notice,  the respondents  had filed  the  statement  of

objections  resisting  the  reliefs  sought  for  by  the  appellant  in  the  writ

petition.  

4) The Writ Court by its impugned order dated 27.2.2004 has rejected

the petition.  The order passed by the Court reads as under :  

“In  view  of  the  preliminary  submissions  made  by the

respondents  in  the  written  statement,  we  find  absolutely  no

merit in this writ petition”.

5) Questioning  the  correctness  or  otherwise  of  the  aforesaid  order

passed by the High Court, the appellant is before us in this appeal.  

6) We have heard learned counsels for the parties.  

7) Having gone through the impugned order, in our considered view, we

cannot sustain the same for the reasons, that, in the writ petition filed, the

appellant had raised several issues in support of the relief sought in the writ

petition.  The High Court without examining any one of the issues raised

2

and canvassed, by cryptic and non-reasoned order, has dismissed the writ

petition. In our view, this is not the way a petition filed under Article 226 or

227 of  the Constitution  of  India  is  to  be disposed of.   The duty to  give

reasons for coming to a decision is of decisive importance  which cannot be

lawfully disregarded.  The giving of the satisfactory reasons is required by

the ordinary man’s sense of justice and also a healthy discipline for all those

who exercise power over others.   This Court in the case of Raj Kishore Jha

vs. State of Bihar and Ors. (2003) 11 SCC 519 has stated:

“Reason is the heartbeat of every conclusion. Without the same, it becomes lifeless”.

8) In view of above discussion, we have no other alternative but to set

aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the High Court for a fresh

consideration of the writ petition.  In the present facts and circumstances of

the case, the parties shall bear their own costs.  The appeal is disposed of.

                                                                                      …………………………………J.                                                                                        [ TARUN CHATTERJEE ]

                                                                                     …………………………………J.                                                                                        [ H.L. DATTU ] New Delhi, February   6, 2009.

3

4