Bias and denial of fair hearing vitiate tribunal proceedings when evidence is gathered without notice or cross-examination.

A tribunal proceeding is vitiated where a member closely related to one party participates from the outset, because the appearance and likelihood of bias undermine the requirement of an impartial hearing. The proceedings were also held illegal where a spot inspection and local enquiry were conducted without notice to the parties, and material gathered was relied upon without recording evidence, examining witnesses, or allowing cross-examination as required by the statutory procedure and natural justice. The impugned occupancy-right order and the proceedings leading to it were quashed, and rehearing before an impartial tribunal with due opportunity to all parties was directed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the participation of a tribunal member closely related to one of the parties vitiated the proceedings for bias; (ii) Whether the spot inspection and local enquiry conducted without notice to the parties and without recording or testing evidence in the manner required by law rendered the proceedings illegal.

Issue (i): Whether the participation of a tribunal member closely related to one of the parties vitiated the proceedings for bias.

Analysis: A fair hearing requires an impartial tribunal. Where a member is closely related to a party and participates from the commencement of the proceedings, the appearance and likelihood of bias undermine the validity of the adjudication. The absence of any denial of the relationship, coupled with the disputed member's participation, supported the challenge to the proceedings.

Conclusion: The proceedings were vitiated by bias, and the petitioner succeeded on this issue.

Issue (ii): Whether the spot inspection and local enquiry conducted without notice to the parties and without recording or testing evidence in the manner required by law rendered the proceedings illegal.

Analysis: The procedure governing the Tribunal required compliance with the prescribed enquiry framework under the Land Revenue law, including public hearing, due notice, recording of evidence, and opportunity to test material relied upon. Reliance on statements gathered at spot inspection behind the back of the parties, without examining such persons as witnesses or permitting cross-examination, was contrary to the statutory procedure and natural justice.

Conclusion: The procedure followed was illegal and the impugned order was liable to be set aside.

Final Conclusion: The impugned occupancy-right order and the proceedings leading to it were quashed, and the matter was directed to be reheard afresh by an impartial Tribunal after due opportunity to all parties.

Ratio Decidendi: A proceeding is vitiated where a closely related member participates in the adjudication or where material evidence is collected and relied upon without notice, recording, and opportunity of cross-examination in breach of statutory procedure and natural justice.

---