Judgment : 1. R. H. Zaidi, J. Instant petition arises out of the proceedings under Sec. 21 (1) (a) of U. P. Urban Buildings (Regulation of Let ting, Rent and Eviction) Act, 1972, for short 'the Act' and is directed against the order passed by the appellate authority allowing the appeal filed by respondent No. 2 in exercise of power under Sec. 22 of the Act. 2. RELEASE application was filed by the petitioner Gyan Chandra, who has died during the pendency of the present petition and after whose death his heirs and legal representatives were substituted in his place as the petitioners. In brief, it was pleaded by Gyan Chandra that the shop in dispute was needed for his personal use and occupation as he wanted to settle his son in business. The release application was opposed and contested by respondent No. 2, who denied the allegations made in the release application and pleaded that the need of Gyan Chandra for the shop in dispute was neither genuine nor bonafide. 3. THE Prescribed Authority after hearing the parties and perusing the record of the case, recorded clear and categorical findings on the questions of need and hardship in favour of Gyan Chandra. THE Prescribed Authority has recorded cogent reasons for the findings arrived at by it. After recording the said findings, the release application was allowed by the Prescribed Authority by its judgment and order dated 5-12-81. Aggrieved by the said judgment and order passed by the Prescribed Authority, respondent No. 2 filed an appeal. THE appellate authority al lowed the said appeal and set aside the order passed by the Prescribed Authority. There after, the present petition was filed by Gyan Chandra in this court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. 4. LEARNED counsel for the petitioner submitted that the appellate authority has acted illegally in reversing the order passed by the Prescribed Authority without reversing the findings recorded by the said Authority. It has also been urged that the appellate authority has, without critically examining the reasons recorded by the Prescribed Authority and without taking into consideration the facts, which were taken into consideration by the Prescribed Authority, substituted its own findings on the question of need and hardship. It has also been urged that the appellate authority has, without critically examining the reasons recorded by the Prescribed Authority and without taking into consideration the facts, which were taken into consideration by the Prescribed Authority, substituted its own findings on the question of need and hardship. In sub stance it has been urged that reasons have not been recorded by the appellate authority to up set the findings recorded by the Prescribed Authority and arbitrarily and abruptly it has been held that the findings recorded by the Prescribed Authority could not be sustained. On the other hand, learned counsel for the contesting respondent submitted that the findings recorded by the appellate authority are findings of fact, which cannot be interfered with in exercise of power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, Reliance in support of the said sub mission has been placed upon the decision in Revindra Singh and others v. III Addl. Distt. Judge, Faizabad, 1992 (2) A. R. C. 308. 5. I have considered the rival submissions made by learned counsel for the par ties. An appeal against the order passed by the Prescribed Authority passed under Sec. 21 is provided under Sec. 22 of the Act, which reads as under: "22. Appeal - Any person aggrieved by an order under Section 21 or Sec. 24 may within thirty days from the date of order prefer an appeal against it to the Distt. Judge and in other respects the provisions of (Section 10) shall nutatis mutan dis apply in relation to such appeal." Section 10 of the said Act provides as under: "10. Appeal against order under Sections (8, 9 and 9-A ).- (1) Any person aggrieved by an order of the Distt. Magistrate under Sec. 8 or Section 9 (or Section 9-A) may within thirty days from the date of the order, prefer an appeal against it to the Distt. Judge and the Distt. Judge may either dispose it of himself or assign it for disposal to an Additional Distt. Judge under his administrative control and may recall it from any such officer, or transfer it to any other such officer. Judge and the Distt. Judge may either dispose it of himself or assign it for disposal to an Additional Distt. Judge under his administrative control and may recall it from any such officer, or transfer it to any other such officer. (2) The appellate authority may confirm, vary or rescind the order, or remand the case to the Distt Magistrate for rehearing and may also take any additional evidence and pending its decision, stay the operation of the order under appeal on such terms, if any, as it thinks fit. (3) No further appeal or revision shall lie against any order passed by the appellate authority under this section and its order shall be final." A reading of Section 22 with Sec. 10 of the Act, clearly shows that the appellate authority has not the power of confirming, varying or rescinding the order under appeal. It has also got power to remand the case to the authority below and to grant interim order on such terms as it thinks fit. The order passed by the appellate authority has been made final under sub-section (3) of Section 10 of the Act. The appellate authority while confirming, varying or rescinding the order, will have to act judicially and in accordance with law. The appellate authority will have to record the reason for passing the said order, particularly while passing an order of reversal. 6. IN Ram Niwas Pandey v. VIII Addl. Distt. Judge, Kanpur and others, 1982 A. R. C. 246, it was held that: "the appellate court was recording a finding of reversal as such it was to take into consideration all the relevant facts and factors, which were taken into consideration by the Prescribed Authority. " In Mohd. Nanhey Mian v. IV Addl. Distt. Judge, Aligarh, 1982 (2) A. R. C. 527, it was ruled by this court as under: "the lower appellate court appears to have made a mess of the entire things, it after citing certain cases, came to an abrupt conclusion that prima facie the need of the son of the landlord was establsihed. When he was reversing the judgment of the Prescribed Authority, it was incumbent upon him to meet the reasons recorded by the Prescribed Authority, while deciding the case. " 7. SIMILARLY in Mahabir Jain v. 1st Addl. Distt. When he was reversing the judgment of the Prescribed Authority, it was incumbent upon him to meet the reasons recorded by the Prescribed Authority, while deciding the case. " 7. SIMILARLY in Mahabir Jain v. 1st Addl. Distt. Judge, Jhansi and others, 1985 (1) ARC 368, it was held that: "actually, if one sees the judgment of the lower appellate court closely there is no escape from coming to the conclusion that the finding recorded by the Prescribed Authority has not been specifically set aside. It cannot be doubted that in case the finding recorded by the Prescribed Authority remains, the application moved by the landlady under Sec. 21 of the Act, would be liable to be dismissed as there would no bona fide re quirement for the shop in dispute. " In the aforesaid decision, in the similar circumstances, the orders passed by the appellate authority have been quashed by this court on the ground that they did not ex amine the findings recorded by the Prescribed Authorities critically and the material, which was relied upon by the Prescribed Authorities and reasons recorded by them for the conclusion arrived at, remained untouched. 8. IN the present case also the appellate authority did not critically examine the findings recorded by the Prescribed Authority, no reason for disagreeing with its findings has been recorded. Appellate Authority has actually proceeded to decide the case as it was not deciding the appeal, but the application under Section 21 of the Act and recorded its own findings contrary to the findings recorded by the Prescribed Authority on the questions of need and hardship involved in the case and thereafter, arbitrarily and abruptly came to the conclusion that: "to my mind, therefore, the finding recorded by learned Prescribed Authority upon the facts and circumstances of the case cannot be sustained and the order of eviction is to be set aside. " Appellate authority did not discuss as to what was in its mind, which has impelled it, not to sustain the order of Prescribed Authority. The Act does not provide specifically or otherwise as to what should be the contents of the judgment of the appellate authority. Although, for exercise of power under Sec. 21, guidelines have been provided under Rule 16 of the Rules framed under the Act. The Act does not provide specifically or otherwise as to what should be the contents of the judgment of the appellate authority. Although, for exercise of power under Sec. 21, guidelines have been provided under Rule 16 of the Rules framed under the Act. Rule 7 of the Rules also provides for the form, contents and manner of presentation of the memorandum of appeals and revisions. It also provide as to how the notices will be issued by the revisional and appellate authorities, but did not provide any guideline for the appellate or revisional authorities to decide the appeals or revisions. 9. UNDER Section 22 of the Act, appeal against the order passed by the Prescribed Authority under Section 21 of the Act lies before the Distt. Judge. The Distt. Judge may dispose of the appeal or assign the same for disposal to an Addl. Distt. Judge under his administrative control as provided under Sec. 10 of the Act. 10. THE orders passed by the authorities in exercising their powers under the Act, particularly those of appellate and revisional authorities are final; but they are subject to the orders passed by the High Court in exercise of its power under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The Apex Court of the country has been emphasizing for recording of reasons particularly by the authorities exercising judicial and quasi-judicial powers, at present, the trend of the authority is that even the administrative orders must contain reasons, if they purport to take away vested rights of any one. It has been ruled that the orders passed without recording reasons are nonest as the recording of the reasons is one of the principle of natural justice. 11. IN Karaipak's case, AIR 1970 SC 150 , the Supreme Court emphasized that the requirement of acting judicially is nothing but to act justly and fairly and not arbitrarily or capriciously. 12. CONDITION to give reasons excludes or at any rate minimises the arbitrariness. In other words, the compulsion to disclose the reasons would ensure that the administrative authority has discharged its function in a fair and just manner. It also gives satisfaction to a party against whom the order is made and also enables the appellate authority and revisional courts to keep the Tribunals within bounds. It is also applicable to a purely administrative inquiry affecting vested rights of others. It also gives satisfaction to a party against whom the order is made and also enables the appellate authority and revisional courts to keep the Tribunals within bounds. It is also applicable to a purely administrative inquiry affecting vested rights of others. Sub-rule (7) of Rule 34 of the Rules framed under the Act provides as under: "the District Magistrate, the Prescribed Authority or the appellate or the revisional authority shall record reasons for every order made under this Act. " Thus in view of the law laid down by the Supreme Court and this court and in view of the aforesaid statutory provision, every order passed by the authorities must contain reasons, what to say, an order or reversal, where it is incumbent upon the appellate and revisional authorities to record reasons for reversing the findings recorded by the authorities below. Provision of Order XLI, Rule 31, C. P. C. which provides for the contents of the judgments of the appellate court, although have not been made applicable expressly to the orders passed by the appellate and revisional authorities under the Act. They are, however, by implication applicable as even, the appellate and revisional authorities are required to record reasons for every order passed by them. The appellate and revisional authorities should formulate the questions for determination in appeals and revisions and, thereafter, should record the reasons for their decisions. Appellate Authority after reversing the findings of prescribed Authority as indicated above, may record its own findings on the questions involved in the case, on the basis of evidence on the record. 13. IN the present case, the appellate authority did not record the reasons for reversal of the findings recorded by the prescribed Authority. It has not been stated as to why the appellate authority did not agree with the findings recorded by the prescribed Authority. Therefore, the impugned order passed by it, is contrary to the provisions of sub-rule (7) of Rule 34 of the Rules framed under the Act and is also against the principles of natural justice. 14. It has not been stated as to why the appellate authority did not agree with the findings recorded by the prescribed Authority. Therefore, the impugned order passed by it, is contrary to the provisions of sub-rule (7) of Rule 34 of the Rules framed under the Act and is also against the principles of natural justice. 14. SO far as the submissions made by the learned counsel for the respondent that the finding of fact recorded by the authorities below cannot be interfered with under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is concerned, there is no quarrel with the proposition of law, but in the instant case, I have taken the view that the appellate authority had no jurisdiction to substitute its own finding for the findings recorded by the prescribed Authority without reversing the finding of the said authority, no value can be attached to the findings of fact recorded by the appellate authority, they are liable to be ignored. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I have got no option; but to allow this petition and to remand the case to the appellate authority. 15. THE writ petition succeeds and is allowed. THE order passed by the appellate authority dated 14-7-83 is quashed and the case is sent back to the appellate authority for decision afresh in the light of the observations made above. 16. IT is further observed that since the parties are litigating since 1979, the appeal shall be decided expeditiously preferably within two months from the date a certified copy of this order is produced before the appellate authority. Parties to bear their own costs. Petition allowed.