Natural justice required hearing before rejecting continued office of profit application; order set aside and reconsideration directed.

An order rejecting an application to continue holding an office or place of profit at increased remuneration was held unsustainable because it was passed without giving the petitioners a hearing, despite the civil consequences of the decision. The authority also failed to examine the petitioners' factual assertions, including disclosures about petitioner no. 2's directorships and the effect of the statements made in the application. The order was therefore set aside and the matter was remitted for reconsideration after notice and hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned order rejecting the application to continue holding an office or place of profit at increased remuneration was liable to be set aside for want of hearing and non-consideration of the petitioners' factual assertions.

Analysis: The order had been passed without affording the petitioners an opportunity of hearing, although the rejection carried civil consequences. The factual basis relied upon for rejection, including the petitioners' disclosure regarding the nature of petitioner no. 2's directorships and the effect of the statements in the application, was not examined before the decision was taken. In these circumstances, the authority's decision was found to be unsatisfactory and vitiated by the failure to hear the petitioners.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was directed to be reconsidered after issuing notice and granting a hearing to the petitioners.

---