Violation of natural justice principles due to non-supply of documents leads to order being set aside.

The High Court found a violation of natural justice principles due to non-supply of relied upon documents and inadequate opportunity for the petitioners to represent their case. The court set aside the impugned order-in-original dated 08.06.2015 solely on the ground of non-supply of documents. The adjudicating authority was directed to provide the documents within a week, with the petitioner required to submit a reply within four weeks. The court emphasized the importance of procedural fairness and granted specific directives for a fair process moving forward.

---

---

Issues: Violation of principles of natural justice due to non-supply of relied upon documents and inadequate opportunity to represent the case.

Issue 1: Non-supply of relied upon documents

The petitioners raised concerns regarding the non-furnishing of certain relied upon documents despite repeated requests. They argued that the order-in-original was passed without allowing them to file a complete reply due to the absence of these documents. The respondents contended that full opportunities were provided and the documents were indeed furnished to the petitioners. However, upon examination of the record produced by the respondents, it was found that while the petitioner's letters requesting the documents were on record, there was no response from the authorities providing the documents. The court concluded that the relied upon documents were not supplied to the petitioner, leading to a violation of principles of natural justice. Consequently, the impugned order-in-original dated 08.06.2015 was set aside on this ground alone.

Issue 2: Inadequate opportunity to represent the case

The second point raised by the petitioners was regarding a letter submitted to the adjudicating authority requesting time to submit a final reply and advance arguments. They claimed that no acceptance or rejection of the letter was communicated, and no further time was granted before the orders-in-original were passed. The petitioners argued that this lack of response deprived them of an adequate opportunity to represent their case, thereby violating the principles of natural justice. The court acknowledged these contentions and emphasized that the failure to provide an opportunity for the petitioners to present their case properly necessitated the setting aside of the impugned order-in-original. The court directed the adjudicating authority to supply copies of all relied upon documents within a week to the petitioner, followed by the submission of a reply within four weeks. It was specified that no further extension of time would be granted, and a date for a personal hearing and subsequent order issuance within four weeks were mandated.

In conclusion, the High Court's judgment addressed the issues of non-supply of relied upon documents and the inadequate opportunity for the petitioners to represent their case. The court found that the failure to provide essential documents and the lack of a proper opportunity for the petitioners to respond amounted to a violation of the principles of natural justice. As a remedy, the impugned order-in-original was set aside, and specific directives were issued to ensure a fair process moving forward, emphasizing the importance of upholding procedural fairness and the right to a meaningful representation in legal proceedings.

---