Reasoned adjudication on merits required: order set aside and remanded where show-cause grounds were not examined.

An adjudication order that fails to examine the grounds raised in the show cause notice and deals only with a limited aspect cannot be sustained as a reasoned decision on merits. Where the appellants consistently dispute the factual basis relied upon against them, the controversy must be determined after considering the relevant issues and granting a reasonable hearing. The impugned order was therefore set aside and the matter remanded to the adjudicating authority for fresh adjudication on merits after a personal hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned order, passed without examining the merits and without dealing with the grounds raised in the show cause notice, was liable to be set aside and the matter remanded for fresh adjudication after giving the appellants a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

Analysis: The adjudication order did not discuss the grounds raised in the show cause notice and proceeded only on one limited aspect. The record also indicated that the appellants had consistently disputed the alleged late filing of the declaration and had not admitted the position relied upon against them. In these circumstances, the order could not be sustained as a reasoned decision on merits. Since the controversy was not decided after considering the relevant issues, a fresh determination by the adjudicating authority was necessary.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for a fresh decision on merits after granting a reasonable opportunity of personal hearing.

Ratio Decidendi: An adjudication order that does not examine the grounds raised and does not decide the dispute on merits cannot be sustained and must be remanded for fresh decision after due hearing.

---