Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

4 of 6

5. This Court reaffirmed this view in its judgment passed in CWP No.25342 of 2016 (Satish Kumar and others vs. Kurukshetra University and another decided on 8th December, 2016) that it is not proper for any instrumentality of State to treat a para-wise reply to a notice of demand for justice as an order issued by it, unless it has been authorised by the statutory authority competent to pass binding order settling rights of parties and the fact of competency is duly indicated in the response before it can be accepted by the writ court as a binding adverse decision based on original record duly considered and reflected in the reply to ignite jurisdiction of judicial review of administrative action. Failing which, the reply to the legal notice cannot be treated in law as an order settling the rights of the parties and binding on them. It can only be treated as an opinion of an Officer which ought not to be put to judicial scrutiny as if it was the view of the competent authority unless it manifestly says so. It is not that reply to a legal notice should not be given, but it should be accompanied by an order in writing passed by the competent authority and in the format the CISF applies to pass adverse orders reflecting upon the rights of the parties.