ORDER Nooty. Ramamohana Rao, J. 1. The two petitioners have mounted a challenge to the orders passed by the State Government contained in their G.O. Rt. No. 13 Higher Education (CE) Department dated 3.7.2014, through which order the State Government has accorded permission to the Management of Chatrapathi Shivaji Degree College, Narayankhed Mandal, Medak District to shift the degree college to Ramayampet, Medak District. The petitioners have raised an objection that the State Government had accorded the necessary permission, unjustly relaxing sub-rule (3) of Rule 14 of the A.P. Educational Institutions (Establishment, Recognition, Administration and Control of Institutions of Higher Education) Rules, 1987. It will be appropriate to notice that under Section100 of the A.P. Education Act, 1982, power is conferred upon the State Government to exempt any educational institution from the operation of all or any of the provisions of the said Act or the rules made thereunder. But however, the most significant component of Section 100 would set out that "for reasons to be specified". Therefore, there is a compulsion on the part of the State Government, while exercising the power under Section 100 of the Act to spell out the reasons. The State Government in the impugned order has not spelt out any reasons, which prompted or impelled it to grant the necessary relaxation, but merely ascribed the reason for grant of relaxation, to the circumstances reported by the Secretary, A.P. State Council for Higher Education. The reasons behind the exercise of power would form the soul and substance of the ultimate decision of the State Government. Hence, the State Government had to necessarily spell out valid reasons that weighed with them for passing the impugned order. 2. In fact, a Division Bench of this Court in Sadasiva Sri Educational Society, Sircilla, Karimnagar District v. Gayathri Degree College, Yellareddypet Mandal, Karimnagar District, 2013 (2) ALD 612 (DB), has clearly set out the principle that the statutory functionary cannot justify its decision by assigning reasons by way of affidavits in the absence of reasons in the impugned order itself. I, have, therefore, no hesitation to arrive at a conclusion that the orders passed by the State Government contained in their G.O. Rt. I, have, therefore, no hesitation to arrive at a conclusion that the orders passed by the State Government contained in their G.O. Rt. No. 13 Higher Education (CE) Department dated 3.7.2014, according permission to the fourth respondent to shift it's college to another premises located at Ramayampet Mandal, Medak District is not sustainable, for sheer lack of reasons behind assigned by the State Government. In all fairness, it must be stated that the learned Counsel for the petitioner Sri N. Sreedhar Reddy, the learned Government Pleader for Higher Education Ms. Vani Reddy, Sri Sudhakar Reddy and Mrs. B. Neeraja Reddy appearing for the fourth respondent have consented that the matter may be remitted back to the State Government for reconsideration. 3. Therefore, I, set aside the order passed by the State Government contained in G.O. Rt. No. 13 Higher Education (CE) Department dated 3.7.2014 and remit the matter back for consideration afresh duly taking into consideration and account the principles enunciated by the Division Bench in the aforementioned judgment. Let this reconsideration exercise be completed as expeditiously as possible, preferably within a period of thirty days from the date of receipt of this order. 4. Writ petition stands disposed of in the above terms. No costs. Consequently, miscellaneous applications if any shall stand closed.