Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:82338-DB Court No. - 3 Case :- WRIT - C No. - 5552 of 2025 Petitioner :- Sweta Janhit Sansthan, Agra, Through Its President Ranjeet Jha Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 4 Others Counsel for Petitioner :- Manoj Yadav,Surendra Kumar Chaubey Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.,Harsh Vardhan Gupta Hon'ble Salil Kumar Rai,J. Hon'ble Arun Kumar Singh Deshwal,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri Harsh Vardhan Gupta, learned counsel for the Nagar Nigam. 2. The present petition has been filed, challenging the order dated 7.3.2025, passed by the Assistant Municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Mathura Vrindavan, Mathura, rejecting the representation of the petitioner filed against the order dated 8.11.2024, cancelling the contract allotted to the petitioner for operating toilets. 3. The right of representation against the order dated 8.11.2024 was provided in the contract itself. The representation was filed before the Municipal Commissioner and the order dated 7.3.2025, passed by the Assistant Municipal Commissioner, discloses that the Commissioner had observed that as the toilets were not being operated by the petitioners in accordance with the rules, therefore, the contract allotted to the petitioner for operating toilets was liable to be cancelled. 4. However, Sri Harsh Vardhan Gupta, who represents the respondents- Municipal Commissioner and other officers of the Nagar Nigam as well as the Nagar Nigam itself, has handed over a copy of the note-sheet of the matter as it was before the Municipal Commissioner and the said note-sheet indicates that a report was submitted to the Municipal Commissioner who, without making any observations, approved the said report on 6.3.2025. 5. Apparently, the said approval by the Municipal Commissioner does not disclose any reason or application of mind by the Municipal Commissioner. Further, the recital in the order dated 7.3.2025 that the Municipal Commissioner had observed that the toilets were not being operated by the petitioner in accordance with rules, is evidently wrong. 6. The aforesaid shows that the representation of the petitioner has been decided mechanically and without application of mind. 7. Accordingly, the order dated 7.3.2025 and the approval dated 6.3.2025 by the Municipal Commissioner to the reports submitted before him are hereby quashed. 8. The matter is remitted back to the municipal Commissioner, Nagar Nigam Mathura Vrindavan, Mathura to pass fresh reasoned orders on the representation filed by the petitioner against the order dated 8.11.2024. 9. With the aforesaid direction, the writ petition is disposed of. Order Date :- 17.5.2025 Vandana Digitally signed by :- VANDANA GAUTAM High Court of Judicature at Allahabad