JUDGMENT Ajit Singh, J. 1. By this petition the petitioner has prayed for quashing of award dated 16.12.2003, passed in Case No.12/96/ID Act Reference, by the Presiding Officer, Labour Court, Bhopal to the extent he has been denied the back wages. 2. The case of petitioner before the Labour Court was that he worked continuously with respondent nos. 1 and 2 on the post of Driver from 1.2.1982 up to 30.9.1992 on which date his services were terminated without assigning any reason and holding enquiry. The petitioner also averred that respondent nos. 1 and 2 did not comply with the mandatory provisions contained in section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. Respondent nos. 1 and 2 denied the claim of petitioner and pleaded that he himself stopped coming for work from September 1992. 3. The Labour Court after appreciating the evidence held that the petitioner had worked for more than 240 days in the calendar year preceding the termination of his service and that his service was terminated without complying with the mandatory provisions contained in section 25F of the Industrial Disputes Act. The Labour Court, therefore, passed an award for his re-instatement but without back wages. 4. It is argued on behalf of the petitioner that the Labour Court committed an illegality in denying back wages to him without assigning any reasons. The learned counsel also submitted that petitioner had clearly averred in the claim that he was not gainfully employed after the termination of his services and even deposed before the Labour Court in this regard. 5. It is now well settled that the conferment of quasi-judicial power implies that the person concerned must follow the rules of natural justice and must give reasons for making the order which he is empowered to make. Purely administrative bodies are also bound to act justly and fairly which may bring in the requirement of natural justice as also the duty to give reasons. Even a non-statutory private body which is not a state under Article 12 of the Constitution but which exercises public functions is bound to follow the principles of 'fairness' and 'good faith' and to act reasonably and its orders are amendable to judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution. Even a non-statutory private body which is not a state under Article 12 of the Constitution but which exercises public functions is bound to follow the principles of 'fairness' and 'good faith' and to act reasonably and its orders are amendable to judicial review under Article 226 of the Constitution. Section 4(1) d of the recently enacted statute, the Right to Information Act, 2005, also requires every public authority of India to 'provide reasons for its administrative or quasi-judicial decisions to affected persons'. (See Principles of Statutory Interpretation by Justice G.P.Singh Xth Edition, 2006 Page 410). 6. Under English Law a quasi-judicial authority need not give reasons unless required to do so by statute but now even there is also a definite shift in favour of the view that reasons should be given. In Flannery V. Halifax Estate Agencies Ltd. (2000) 1 All ER 373 at pages 377 and 378 (CA) comments have been made that the duty to give reasons "is function of due process and, therefore, of justice. Its rationale has two principle aspects. The first is that fairness surely requires that the parties especially the losing party should be left in no doubt why they have won or lost. The second is that a requirement to give reasons concentrates the mind and if it is fulfilled the resulting decision is much more likely to be soundly based." 7. On perusal of the impugned award, we find that the Labour Court has not assigned any reason whatsoever for denying back wages to the petitioner. We accordingly quash the award to the extent petitioner has been denied back wages. We also remand the matter to the Labour court for afresh decision on the question of back wages to the petitioner. It is expected that the Labour Court will decide the matter as expeditiously as possible but not later than 6 months from the date of receipt of the copy of this order. 8. The petition is allowed but without any order as to costs. Certified copy as per rules.