Bombay High Court

Dr Rupali Sujit BendreversusThe State of Maharashtra

Disposal: Allowed

Holding

An order passed without reasons and application of mind is invalid and must be set aside.

Summary

The petitioners challenged an order dated 22 April 2022 issued by the State Minister that set aside the orders of the Chief Officer, Zilla Parishad, Satara. The petitioners argued that the Minister’s order was passed without recording any reasons or applying his mind to the findings recorded by the Block Development Officer and the Chief Executive Officer against respondents 5 to 8. The respondents conceded that the order lacked reasons. The Court examined whether the Minister’s order complied with the requirement of reasoned decision‑making under administrative law. Finding that the order was unreasoned and not objectively considered, the Court held it to be invalid and ordered the matter to be remanded to the Minister for a fresh, reasoned decision after giving parties an opportunity of hearing. Consequently, the writ petition was partly allowed, quashing the impugned order.

Issues considered

Whether an order passed by a Minister without recording reasons and application of mind is valid.
Whether the impugned order should be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh consideration.

Subjects

administrative law
reasoned order
natural justice
writ petition
remand
ministerial discretion

Judgment

                       1                          117-WP-3473-2026 (C)

     IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIRCUIT
                      BENCH AT KOLHAPUR
                 CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                   WRIT PETITION NO. 3473 OF 2026

Dr Rupali Sujit Bendre & Ors.                      …...Petitioners
      Vs.
The State Of Maharashtra & Ors.                    …...Respondents

                                 …..
Mr. Rushikesh Barge, Advocate for Petitioner.
Mr. Vishwanath Talkute, Advocate for the Respondents.
Mr. Sanjay D. Rayrikar, AGP for Respondent-State.
                                 …..

                     CORAM :     SHAILESH P. BRAHME, J.
                       DATE :    5TH OCTOBER, 2026.

ORDER :


1.       The petitioner is assailing the order dated 22.04.2022 passed

by the learned Minister, whereby the appeal was allowed and the

orders passed by the Chief Officer, Zilla Parishad, Satara, were set

aside.


2.       Mr. Vishwanath Talkute, learned counsel appearing for

respondent nos. 5 to 8, on instructions from his clients, would

submit that he concedes that no reasons have been recorded by the

learned Minister while passing the impugned order.


3.       I have considered the submissions of both the learned counsel
                     2                           117-WP-3473-2026 (C)

on the merits of the matter as well as on the manner in which the

impugned order has been passed. The Block Development Officer

and the Chief Executive Officer recorded findings against respondent

nos. 5 to 8. However, those findings have not been dealt with by the

learned Minister in an objective manner.


4.    The impugned order lacks reasons and application of mind. It

would be appropriate to remand the matter to the learned Minister

so as to have an objective scrutiny after considering the submissions

of the parties and the material on record, as well as the material

proposed to be placed on record.


5.    The writ petition is partly allowed by quashing the impugned

order and relegating the parties to learned Minister decide afresh on

its own merits after extending an opportunity of hearing.




                               [ SHAILESH P. BRAHME J. ]


Suresh

Continue reading with your account

Checking your session…