ORDER CH. IJAZ AHMAD, J. - Learned counsel tor the petitioner stated that order of respondent No. 2 is not speaking order and is liable to be set aside. The contention needs consideration. Admit.
Notice.
2. Learned Addl. A.G. Present in Court accepts notice on behalf of respondents and he stated that para were comments be considered as written statement and case may be decided as Pacce case.
Main Case.
Petitioner has challenged the order dated 27,10.1909 passed by the respondent No. 2 through this writ petition. Learned counsel for the petitioner stated that respondent No. 2 has passed, the order without applying his independent mind and without reasons. He further stated that he decided the appeal in the absence of the learned counsel for the petitioner.
2. Learned Addl. A.G. Under instructions stated that clerk of the petitioner entered appearance and did not request for adjournment. Representative of the petitioner argued the case and thereafter respondent No. 2 passed the order against the petitioner. He further stated that the order dated 27.10.1999 is based on reasons. Therefore, is not liable to be set aside.
3. I have given my anxious considerations to the contention of the learned counsel tor the parties and perused the record myself. Order dated 27.10.1999 does not reveal that respondent No. 2 has passed the same with reasons after addition of Section 24-A in the General Clauses Act. It is the duty and obligation of the public functionaries to redress the grievance of the citizens with reasons.
The order of the respondent No. 2 does not contain any reason in para No. 3. Therefore, is not sustainable in the eyes of law as the principle laid down in the following judgments:- 1998 PSC 1156 {Zain Yar Khan's case)
1998 SCM R 2268 (M/s. Airport Support Service's case).
Even before the addition of Section 24-A in the General Clauses Act, it is the duty of the respondent No. 2 to pass a speaking order as the principle laid down in PLD 1970 S.C. 173.
In view of what has been discussed above, the writ petition is accepted and the impugned order dated 27.10.1999 is set aside meaning thereby appeal filed by the petitioner deemed to be pending adjudication. Petitioner is directed to appear before respondent No. 2 on 15.3.2000 who is directed | to decide the same with reasons after providing personal hearing to all the I concerned.