There must be transparency and accountability in the dealings of SRO Nanguneri but not so because of corruption and non reasoned approach

Even in respect of administrative orders Lord Denning M.R. in Breen v. Amalgamated Engineering Union (1971 (1) All E.R. 1148) observed "The giving of reasons is one of the fundamentals of good administration". In Alexander Machinery (Dudley) Ltd. v. Crabtree (1974 LCR 120) it was observed: "Failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice". Reasons are live links between the mind of the decision taker to the controversy in question and the decision or conclusion arrived at". Reasons substitute subjectivity by objectivity. The emphasis on recording reasons is that if the decision reveals the "inscrutable face of the sphinx", it can, by its silence, render it virtually impossible for the Courts to perform their appellate function or exercise the power of judicial review in adjudging the validity of the decision. Right to reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system, reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind to the matter before Court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made, in other words, a speaking out. The "inscrutable face of a sphinx" is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or quasi-judicial performance.

Mahesh Pratap Singh Yogi M P Singh <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>

Re: Reg. Cancellation of Document 803/22 SRO Nanguneri
1 message

sudalai kumar <ch09ph38@uohyd.ernet.in>27 July 2022 at 00:33
To: "cs@tn.gov.in" <cs@tn.gov.in>, "cmcell@tn.gov.in" <cmcell@tn.gov.in>, "sronanguneri@tnreginet.net" <sronanguneri@tnreginet.net>, "sroValliyur@tnreginet.net" <sroValliyur@tnreginet.net>, "drotveli@tnreginet.net" <drotveli@tnreginet.net>, "igregn@tnreginet.net" <igregn@tnreginet.net>
Cc: Bala <balasubramanian.energyaudit@gmail.com>, "yogimpsingh@gmail.com" <yogimpsingh@gmail.com>
Sir/Madam,
                      Today I have gone to Nanguneri SRO to prove my claims with my ration cards, aadhar cards, my firm registration copy, property tax copies and PAN card and submitted the DRO FAA copy with all the above mentioned documents at SRO. Mr Rajesh SRO is not available and a new temporary SRO was available to take my request. He submitted it to the Thapal sections and will see it. Mr Rajesh will be available only after 29th July.
DRO/FAA asked me to prove my claims with documents but they have not mentioned the name of the documents to cancel the registration and save my ancestral property from fraudulent registrations.

On Mon, Jul 25, 2022 at 2:39 AM Sudalai Kumar <ss.kumar1987@hotmail.com> wrote:

Sir/Madam,

                    Regarding the same incident of fraudulent registration on my share of agricultural lands and selling those lands without my signatures I filed the RTI application and received the RTI reply from U section for the action. But so far I have not received any ATR from the registration department and therefore I applied to SIC also for the second appeal. More than two years are going to be over and I am not able to do any farming works or

 

Sent from Mail for Windows

 

Yogi

An anti-corruption crusader. Motive to build a strong society based on the principle of universal brotherhood.

1 Comments

Whatever comments you make, it is your responsibility to use facts. You may not make unwanted imputations against any body which may be baseless otherwise commentator itself will be responsible for the derogatory remarks made against any body proved to be false at any appropriate forum.

  1. Even in respect of administrative orders Lord Denning M.R. in Breen v. Amalgamated Engineering Union (1971 (1) All E.R. 1148) observed "The giving of reasons is one of the fundamentals of good administration". In Alexander Machinery (Dudley) Ltd. v. Crabtree (1974 LCR 120) it was observed: "Failure to give reasons amounts to denial of justice". Reasons are live links between the mind of the decision taker to the controversy in question and the decision or conclusion arrived at". Reasons substitute subjectivity by objectivity. The emphasis on recording reasons is that if the decision reveals the "inscrutable face of the sphinx", it can, by its silence, render it virtually impossible for the Courts to perform their appellate function or exercise the power of judicial review in adjudging the validity of the decision. Right to reason is an indispensable part of a sound judicial system, reasons at least sufficient to indicate an application of mind to the matter before Court. Another rationale is that the affected party can know why the decision has gone against him. One of the salutary requirements of natural justice is spelling out reasons for the order made, in other words, a speaking out. The "inscrutable face of a sphinx" is ordinarily incongruous with a judicial or quasi-judicial performance.

    ReplyDelete
Previous Post Next Post