JUDGMENT : This intra-Court appeal is directed against the interim order dated 21.09.2015 passed by the learned Single Judge of this High Court, whereby he has dismissed appellant's application for stay. 2. The case of appellant is that there is a public way towards the Western side of his house, which leads to main road and ultimately to the railway station. Respondent No.2 filed an application before the Gram Panchayat for allotment of plot. And that plot of land is part of public way. The Gram Panchayat has illegally decided on 20.10.2014 to grant 'patta' of plot in favour of respondent No.2. Aggrieved, the appellant filed S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.11034/2015 along with an application for stay of the order of Gram Panchayat regarding grant of 'patta' of plot. And the Learned Single Judge, by the impugned order, has dismissed the application for stay. 3. The main grievance of the appellant is that the learned Single Judge has rejected the application for stay by one line order without assigning any reason. We find substance in the submission of the appellant as in the impugned order neither the facts nor reasons are mentioned for rejecting the application. It is now well settled that conferment of quasi-judicial power implies that a person concerned must follow the rules of natural justice and must give reasons for making an order which he is empowered to make. In Flannery v. Halifax Estate Agencies Ltd. (2000) 1 All ER 373, pp. 377, 378, the Supreme Court has held 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. Also in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597 , the Supreme Court has held that necessity to give reason is a healthy check against abuse or misuse of power for if the reasons recorded are extraneous or irrelevant, the order would be struck down. 4. Also in Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 597 , the Supreme Court has held that necessity to give reason is a healthy check against abuse or misuse of power for if the reasons recorded are extraneous or irrelevant, the order would be struck down. 4. For these reasons, we set aside the impugned order and remand the matter to the learned Single Judge for afresh decision on the application for stay. 5. The appeal is allowed to the above extent. Appeal allowed.