JUSTICE J. M. MALIK, PRESIDING MEMBER (ORAL) 1. Learned counsel for the petitioners present. None is present for the respondents despite service. Costs of Rs.10,000/- has been paid. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioner heard. Our attention has been drawn to the judgment of the State Commission. The State Commission has passed cyclostyled order. Learned counsel for the petitioner has invited our attention towards the authority of the Apex Court, which is reported in case of Kranti Associates Pvt. Ltd. and anr. Vs. Sh. Masood Ahmed Khan and Ors. decided on 8.9.2010 and reported in 2010(9) SCC 496 wherein in para 23, the Apex Court was pleased to observe: “23.In M/s Mahabir Prasad Santosh Kumar vs. State of U.P. and Ors. AIR 1970 SC 1302, while dealing with U.P. Sugar Dealers License Order under which the license was cancelled, this Court held that such an -3- order of cancellation is quasi-judicial and must be a speaking one. This Court further held that merely giving an opportunity of hearing is not enough and further pointed out where the order is subject to appeal, the necessity to record reason is even greater. The learned Judge held that the recording of reasons in support of a decision on a disputed claim ensures that the decision is not a result of caprice, whim or fancy but was arrived at after considering the relevant law and that the decision was just.” 3. This authority squarely applies to this case. Consequently, we remand the case to the State Commission and direct the parties to appear before the State Commission on 19.11.2013. The order passed by the State Commission is set aside. The State Commission is directed to apply its mind and give reasons in respect of its decision. 4. The revision petition stands disposed of. | 
