RANGNATH vs DAULATRAO AND ORS.

The Supreme Court held that the State Government was not required to provide a personal hearing to the appellant before rejecting the statutory appeal, as a non-speaking order is not necessarily invalid. The Court clarified that mere service of a notice terminating tenancy does not end the tenancy unless possession is directed to be delivered, thus doubting the full bench decision of the Bombay High Court. The appellant's claim that the respondent was not a tenant was rejected, as the appellant had consistently treated the respondent as a tenant, and the issue of the respondent's rights was barred by res judicata due to a prior decision.