H. G. BALAKRISHNA, J. ( 1 ) THE petitioner is seeking for quashing the Endorsement under Annexure-E, dated 25-7-1983 issued by the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Madikeri Division, madikeri, informing the petitioner that his request for redemption of timber from sy. No. 70 of Uluguli village has been rejected by the Government in their letter No. FFD 178 FAD 82, dated 30-5-1983. ( 2 ) THE case of the petitioner is that the rejection of the application of thepetitioner dated 5-12-1975 for redemption of timber is arbitrary and without reasons and there is no justification for not granting the necessary permission to the petitioner. ( 3 ) THE communication dated 30-5-1983 issued by the Secretary to the Government,food and Forest Department, to the Chief Conservator of Forests (General), bangalore, reads as follows: subject : Redemption of limber standing in Survey No. 70 of Uluguli village belonging to Shri S. B. Jayaraj of punnia Estate. With reference to your letter No. A. 6. MIS 30/1982-83, dated 7-2-1983 on the above subject, 1 am directed to stale that the request of Sri S. B. Jayaraj for redemption of timber from Survey No. 70 of Uluguli village cannol be complied with. He may be informed accordingly. Connected records received along with your letter dated 27-7-1982 are returned herewith. With reference to your letter No. A. 6. MIS 30/1982-83, dated 7-2-1983 on the above subject, I am directed to state that the request of Sri S. B. Jayaraj for redemption of timber from Survey No. 70 of Uluguli village cannot be complied with. He may be informed accordingly. Connected records received along with your letter dated 27-7-1982 arc returned herewith. Yours faithfully, sd/- (B. T. RANGANATH) under Secretary to Government, food and Forest Department. ( 4 ) THE above letter is dated 30-5-1983 bearing No. FFD 178 FAD 82. It is byreferring to this letter, the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Madikeri Division, madikeri, informed the petitioner vide Annexure-E, dated 25-7-1983 that his request for redemption of timber has been rejected. ( 5 ) THE point for consideration is whether such an order could be passed withoutassigning reasons. The discretion to grant or not to grant permission for redemption of timber is vested in the competent Authority under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 read with Karnalaka Forest Rules, 1969. The discretion is statutory in nature. ( 5 ) THE point for consideration is whether such an order could be passed withoutassigning reasons. The discretion to grant or not to grant permission for redemption of timber is vested in the competent Authority under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 read with Karnalaka Forest Rules, 1969. The discretion is statutory in nature. Statutory discretion is intended to be exercised judiciously and not arbitrarily. When no reasons are given, it is difficult to divine what operated on the mind of the authority exercising the discretion. One way of looking at it is that the authority had no reasons to give at all. By issuing a non-speaking order, by which I mean an order passed unsupported by reasons, the authority cannot seek shelter under silence. Silent order is not known to an executive or administrative order passed in exercise of statutory power. Statutory power cannot be exercised arbitrarily by quasi-judicial authority under the Statute. Such arbitrary exercise of power is totally inconsistent with the Rule of Law. ( 6 ) IN the instant case, neither the order passed by the Under Secretary togovernment, Food and Forest Department dated 30-5-1983 nor the Endorsement issued by the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Madikeri Division, Madikeri, vide Annexure-E, dated 25-7-1983 could be regarded as speaking orders and, I am of the opinion that the grievance of the petitioner is fully justified. The impugned order or communication informing the petitioner that his application for redemption of timer has been rejected, cannot be sustained. Hence, the following: order the writ petition is allowed and the Endorsement vide Annexure-E, dated 25-7-1983 issued by the Deputy Conservator of Forests, Madikeri Division, Madikeri, is hereby quashed. The competent authority under the Karnataka Forest Act, 1963 r/w Karnataka Forest Rules, 1969 is hereby directed to consider the application of the petitioner dated 5-12-1975 on merits and in accordance with law within 90 days from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. A copy of this order shall be forwarded forthwith to the Divisional Forest Officer, Madikeri, Coorg District. --- *** --- .