Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the Trade Tax Tribunal was justified in holding that the Divisional Level Committee lacked jurisdiction to recall its earlier ex parte order withdrawing inclusion of plastic paper pouches in the eligibility certificate, and whether the recall order was invalid as a second review.
Analysis: The earlier withdrawal order had been passed behind the applicant's back without affording any opportunity of hearing, although the order affected civil rights. An order carrying civil consequences must comply with the principles of natural justice unless expressly excluded. The earlier order was therefore vulnerable as being passed in breach of natural justice and without jurisdiction, since the Committee had no power to cancel or amend an eligibility certificate already granted. The subsequent application was not a second review in substance, but an application to recall an ex parte order passed after an intervening event. The departmental remedy, if any, lay under the statutory scheme governing eligibility certificates.
Conclusion: The Tribunal's view that the recall order was without authority was incorrect, and the revision was allowed in favour of the applicant.
Final Conclusion: The Committee's recall of the ex parte withdrawal order was upheld, and the Tribunal's contrary order was set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: An administrative order affecting civil rights cannot be sustained if passed without notice and hearing, and a body lacking power to cancel or amend an already granted certificate cannot treat recall of an ex parte, jurisdictionally defective order as an impermissible second review.