JUDGMENT 1. - This is an intra court appeal filed by writ petitioner of W.P. No.3478/2010 under Rule 134 of Rajasthan High Court Rules against an order dated 22.4.2010 passed by Single Judge in aforementioned writ petition. 2. By impugned order, the learned Single Judge dismissed appellants' writ petition and in consequence upheld the order dated 25.3.2010 (Annex.6) passed in appeal No.6/2010 by Superintendent Engineer. 3. So the question that arises for consideration in this intra-court appeal is whether learned Single Judge was justified in dismissing the writ petition of appellants and in consequence justified in upholding the order dated 25.3.2010 impugned in the writ petition? 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of record of the case, we are inclined to allow the appeal and while setting aside of the impugned order of writ court, allow the writ petition and in consequence quash the order dated 25.3.2010 Annex.6 to writ petition passed by R-3 impugned in the writ petition and remand the case to Respondent No.3 - i.e. Superintending Engineer, Vijay Nagar for deciding the appeal No.6/2010 afresh on merits in accordance with law. 5. One of the contentions of appellants (writ petitioner) while assailing the order dated 25.3.2010 in the writ petition was that the appellate authority (R.3) while deciding the appeal did not assign any reasons. In other words, the legality of order was impugned by the writ petitioner on the ground that impugned order being totally an unreasoned one, it is not legally and factually sustainable and hence it should be set aside. 6. The aforesaid submission did not find favour to learned Single Judge and hence writ petition was dismissed though on other grounds. 7. Having perused the order dated 25.3.2010 impugned in the writ, we find force in the aforementioned submission of learned counsel for the appellants, which was reiterated in appeal. In our view, the submission deserves acceptance. 8. This is how the appellate authority decided the appeal in sequel to order dated 22.1.2010 passed by this Court in SBCWP No.7906/2009 in the earlier round of litigation in this very case. In our view, the submission deserves acceptance. 8. This is how the appellate authority decided the appeal in sequel to order dated 22.1.2010 passed by this Court in SBCWP No.7906/2009 in the earlier round of litigation in this very case. bl U;k;ky; }kjk fu/kkZfjr fnukad dks nksuksa i{kksa ds odhyksa dks lquus ds mijkUr ;g fu.kZ; ikfjr fd;k tkrk gS fd eq0ua0 151@221 ds fy, ukdk fdyk ua0 21 esa eq0ua0 151@21 ,oa eq0ua0 151@22 dh iRFkj ykbZu (Boundary) ls 8 QhV nwjh ij Lohd`r fd;k tkrk gS vkSj iqjkus lHkh uDds can djus gsrq vknsf'kr fd;k tkrk gSA u;k ukdk fuekZ.k dk leLr [kpkZ nksuksa i{k cjkcj cjkcj ogu djsaxs rFkk fuekZ.k [kpZ dh jkf'k 1 ekg ds vanj vanj vf/k'kk"kh vfHk;Urk ty lalk/ku v0'kk0 [k.M f}rh; ?kM+lkuk ds dk;kZy; esa tek djokuh gksxh vkSj tc rd u;s ukdk dk fuekZ.k ugha gks tkrk rc rd iqjkuk ukdk pkyw jgsxkA mDr fu.kZ; vkt fnukad 25@3@10 dks ikfjr fd;k x;kA " 9. With respect, we can not concur with the manner in which the appellate authority disposed of the appeal. Admittedly, it does not contain any reasons much less justifiable reasons in support of the conclusions and eventual directions contained therein. It is a trite law that every judicial order be that original or appellate must contain reasons as to why the application/appeal is being allowed or rejected and why any directions are called for while disposing of the case. If no reasons are assigned, then an order becomes unsustainable in law. It is liable to be set aside on this ground alone. Indeed no authority is needed to support this principle it being too well settled one. 10. We are, therefore, inclined to set aside the order dated 25.3.2010 on the aforementioned ground, which was impugned in the writ petition. 11. In view of foregoing discussion, we do not wish to examine any other factual issue arising in the case nor we wish to take note of any factual aspect of the case. It is not necessary. It is now for the parties to appear before the same appellate authority which had decided the appeal No.6/2010 to enable the authority concerned to decide the appeal afresh on merits strictly in accordance with law by passing a reasoned order in support of its conclusion and keeping in view the earlier order of this Court dated 22.3.2010 passed in SBCWP No.7906/2009. Parties to appear before the appellate authority on 14.5.2010. The appellate authority would decide the appeal within three months from the date of parties appearance. 12. The appeal so also the writ petition thus, succeed and are allowed to the extent indicated above. Impugned order passed by writ court and order dated 25.3.2010 (Annex.P-6) impugned in the writ petition are set aside with aforesaid directions to be complied with by the parties to this appeal so also by appellate authority. No cost.Appeal Allowed. *******