High Court Quashes Unreasoned DRT Order; Emphasises Judicial Application of Mind, Urges Finance Ministry to Consider Officer Training
- REEDLAW
- May 25
- 2 min read
The High Court quashed an unreasoned order passed by the DRT, emphasised the necessity of judicial application of mind, and urged the Ministry of Finance to consider training the presiding officer concerned.
The Allahabad High Court, through a Single-Judge Bench comprising Justice Pankaj Bhatia, recently adjudicated a writ petition and held that any judicial or quasi-judicial order must reflect proper application of mind and provide cogent reasons. The absence of such reasoning renders the order legally unsustainable. Consequently, the Court quashed the DRT’s order dismissing the interim relief application, finding it unreasoned and in violation of the principles of natural justice and fair adjudication.
The High Court considered a writ petition challenging the order dated 02.05.2025 passed by the Debt Recovery Tribunal (DRT), Lucknow, wherein the petitioner’s application for interim relief had been rejected. The petitioner’s counsel contended that, although the DRT’s orders are ordinarily appealable, the impugned order was demonstrative of serious procedural deficiencies and reflected poorly on the manner in which the DRT was functioning.
It was submitted that the DRT had not engaged in any meaningful adjudication of the contentions raised. Instead, the impugned order merely recorded the parties' submissions in a perfunctory manner—factual inaccuracies included—and concluded with an abrupt dismissal of the interim relief application, without assigning any reasons. The petitioner emphasised that reasoned decision-making is fundamental to the rule of law and any judicial or quasi-judicial order must reflect due consideration of the pleadings and legal issues involved.
The counsel for the respondents, while attempting to defend the impugned order, conceded that the order lacked the reasoning expected from a judicial tribunal. Upon reviewing the order, the High Court found that it reflected total non-application of mind and, prima facie, indicated inadequate training of the Tribunal member concerned. The Court took a serious view of the growing pattern of similarly deficient orders from the DRT, Lucknow.
Accordingly, the High Court quashed the order dated 02.05.2025, remanded the matter to the DRT for fresh consideration, and directed the Tribunal to pass a reasoned and lawful order within four weeks. Meanwhile, the Court restrained the respondents from taking coercive action against the petitioner during this period. Furthermore, the Court directed that a copy of the judgment be forwarded to the Ministry of Finance, Government of India, both through the Senior Registrar and counsel for the Union of India, for appropriate action, including consideration of training for the concerned Tribunal member.
The writ petition was disposed of with these observations and directions.
Mr. Alok Saxena and Paras Pradhan, Advocates, represented the Petitioners.
A.S.G.I. and C.S.C. appeared for the Respondent.
Subscribers can access premium content such as the full text of the case, detailed analysis, ratio decidendi, headnotes, legal research, cited case laws, and the latest updates on statutes, notifications, and more. To subscribe, please click Subscribe.
If you are a subscriber, please explore these resources by clicking the following citation/link.
Comments