The Kerala High Court, in Renjini K.K. v. Mannancherry Grama Panchayat & Ors. [2026:KER:33874], has reiterated that quasi-judicial tribunals cannot dispose of appeals through cryptic conclusions devoid of reasoning, holding that every adjudicatory authority must record clear reasons reflecting application of mind.
The High Court set aside an order of the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, which had upheld the rejection of a building numbering application filed by Renjini K.K., a resident of Alappuzha. She had constructed a 560 sq. ft. residential building in 2019 on her property in Komalapuram Village, Alappuzha — a structure that, according to her, fell within the exemption under the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011, which did not require a building permit for such small residential constructions.
However, the Panchayat treated the structure as commercial in nature, requiring regularisation, and rejected her request for a building number and occupancy certificate, citing violation of setback requirements. Her appeal before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions was also dismissed.
The petitioner then challenged the Tribunal’s order, arguing that it failed to consider her detailed legal and factual contentions. Agreeing with the petitioner, the High Court observed that the Tribunal had merely narrated the facts and concluded, in a few lines, that the Panchayat was justified in refusing regularisation.
The High Court held that the Tribunal Rules, 1999, prescribe a detailed procedure for the consideration of a petition — including how a petition is to be submitted, the documents to accompany it, the powers of the Tribunal, and the hearing of the parties’ pleadings. Given such a detailed procedure, it was the Tribunal’s duty to pass a speaking order, and the impugned order failed to meet that standard.
The High Court relied on the Division Bench decision in Ambili S v. Vinod Kumar Pilla (2022) and the Supreme Court’s ruling in Chairman and Managing Director, United Commercial Bank v. P.C. Kakkar [AIR 2003 SC 1571], reiterating that recording reasons is an essential component of natural justice and prevents arbitrariness in administrative and quasi-judicial decision-making.
Accordingly, the High Court set aside the Tribunal’s order as well as the consequential demolition notice issued by the Panchayat, and directed the Tribunal to reconsider the appeal afresh after granting a hearing to all affected parties.
