Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:74577-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- SPECIAL APPEAL No. - 410 of 2025 Appellant :- Bachchuram Ramswaroop Singh Mahavidyalaya Respondent :- State of U.P. and 2 others Counsel for Appellant :- Gaurabh Srivastava,Vikrant Pandey Counsel for Respondent :- Meenakshi Singh, A.C.S.C.,Pratik Chandra Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Kshitij Shailendra,J. 1. This appeal is directed against order dated 25.04.2025 passed by learned Single Judge in Writ - C No. 12602 of 2025 whereby while disposing of the writ petition filed by the petitioner/appellant against order dated 17.03.2025, the appellant has been directed to file a detailed representation against order dated 17.03.2025 and respondent has been directed to decide the same after affording opportunity of hearing. Whereafter, direction has been given that the order dated 17.03.2025, which was impugned in the writ petition, shall abide by the order to be passed by the respondent no. 3 on the representation of the petitioner/appellant. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant made submissions that learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the order impugned dated 17.03.2025 revealed that the appellant was not afforded any opportunity of hearing by the respondent no. 3 before passing the order impugned, the order cast aspersions and serious allegations against the petitioner-college by alleging that the petitioner-college was involved in mass copying, however, despite such finding, the order has not been set aside and direction has been given to make a representation qua the said unreasoned order and therefore, the order impugned deserves to be quashed and set aside. 3. Further submission has been made that in identical nature writ petition against the same nature order passed by respondent no. 3, in Writ - C No. 11373 of 2025, a co-ordinate Bench had set aside the order and left it free for the respondent to pass a fresh order, however, the said order was not followed by learned Single Judge. 4. Learned counsel for the respondents attempted to support the order impugned by indicating that now opportunity would be provided to the petitioner/appellant. 5. We have considered the submission made by counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record. 6. The petition was filed questioning the validity of order dated 17.03.2025. Once learned Single Judge came to the conclusion that the same was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and a bare look at the said order also reveals that the same does not contain any reason despite the fact that the appellant has filed reply to the said show cause notice, the order was required to be set aside. The direction given to make a representation qua an order, which was passed in violation of principles of natural justice and did not contain any reason, would essentially amount to order a post decisional hearing, which cannot be countenanced. 7. Consequently, the appeal is allowed. The order dated 17.03.2025 passed by respondent no. 3 and order dated 25.04.2025 passed in Writ - C No. 12602 of 2025 are set aside. 8. The respondent would be free to pass a fresh order pursuant to the show cause notice issued to the petitioner/appellant, response thereof has already been filed, after providing opportunity of hearing to the appellant in accordance with law. Order Date :- 8.5.2025 nd (Kshitij Shailendra, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- NISITH DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad