ORDER : 1. This writ petition is under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the order dated 22.03.2018 as contained under Annexure-3 passed by Deputy Commissioner in R.M.A. No.60 of 2017-18 whereby and whereunder the appeal preferred by the petitioner against the order dated 29.08.2017 passed by Sub-Divisional Officer, Godda in R.E.R. No.186 of 2006-07 by which the petitioner has been directed to be evicted from the land in question has not been admitted. 2. It is the case of the petitioner that the appeal against the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer has been preferred which is statutory appeal but without assigning any reason, the same has not been admitted, therefore it is a cryptic and mechanical order, hence, is not sustainable. 3. Learned AC to SC-VII submitted that the appeal has not been admitted, it is for the reason that the appellate authority has gone across the order passed by the Sub-Divisional Officer, therefore, the same may not be interfered with. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and after considering the submission of the petitioner and looking to the order dated 22.03.2018, it is evident that the jurisdiction of the Deputy Commissioner has been invoked under the provision of appeal as provided under Section 63 of the Santhal Pargana Tenancy Act, 1949. 5. It is the settled legal position that when any authority has been conferred with the power of appeal, it is incumbent upon the appellate authority to appreciate the factual aspect vis-a-viz, the finding recorded by the original authority so that it can be said that the ground of appeal urged by the appellant has been appreciated for its consideration. 6. It is further legal position that any order without any reason amounts to violation of principles of natural justice and is not sustainable in the eye of law, reason being that in absence of any reason of an order passed by the appellate authority or the revisional authority, it cannot be said that the factual aspect has been appreciated or considered and consideration means active application of mind, the same is to be reflected from the face of the order and it is only then the order can be said to be an order in the eye of law. 7. 7. Keeping the above settled position of law and going across the order passed by the Deputy Commissioner, Godda dated 22.03.2018 who in exercise of the appellate power is only against the order passed by the S.D.O. and not admitted the appeal, therefore, there is no appreciation of the factual aspect urged by the petitioner and hence is not sustainable in the eye of law. 8. In view thereof, this writ petition is allowed. In consequence thereof, the order dated 22.03.2018 is quashed. 9. The matter is remitted before the Deputy Commissioner, Godda to take a fresh decision on the basis of the materials available on record after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and in accordance with law within a period of 08 weeks from the date of receipt of copy of the order. 10. In consequence thereof, the consequent decision is also quashed. The follow up action will depend upon the final decision taken by the Deputy Commissioner, Godda as directed and indicated hereinabove. 11. In view thereof, the writ petition is disposed of.