Fair hearing and prior adjudication govern reassessment, disputed damages recovery, and royalty waiver claims.

A reassessment completed without granting a reasonable opportunity of hearing was treated as vitiated and set aside, and delay and laches did not justify rejection where earlier proceedings were under interim stay and fairness in the reassessment process was lacking. Disputed contractual damages could not be recovered through revenue recovery proceedings unless the liability had first been independently adjudicated and ascertained; a party cannot determine its own claim of breach. The royalty demand connected with granite quarrying was not finally decided, but recovery was kept in abeyance pending consideration of a fresh representation for waiver.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the reassessment orders were vitiated for want of reasonable opportunity and whether the writ petition was liable to be rejected on delay and laches; (ii) whether disputed damages arising out of an alleged breach of contract could be recovered through revenue recovery proceedings without prior adjudication; (iii) whether the royalty demand for granite quarrying could be sustained and whether the petitioner was entitled to seek waiver of the royalty demand.

Issue (i): Whether the reassessment orders were vitiated for want of reasonable opportunity and whether the writ petition was liable to be rejected on delay and laches.

Analysis: The reassessment had been completed soon after the remand, despite the petitioner seeking time to pursue a statutory appeal and to place materials before the assessing authority. The refusal to grant a reasonable opportunity meant that the petitioner was denied fair hearing in the reassessment process. Although there was delay before approaching the Court, the Court held that the facts did not justify non-suiting the petitioner merely on the ground of delay and laches, especially when the earlier proceedings were already under interim stay and the assessment orders had been passed without adequate opportunity.

Conclusion: The reassessment orders were vitiated and were liable to be set aside; the objection based on delay and laches was rejected.

Issue (ii): Whether disputed damages arising out of an alleged breach of contract could be recovered through revenue recovery proceedings without prior adjudication.

Analysis: The demand raised by the departmental authorities was for alleged damages and loss said to have arisen from breach of contract. The Court applied the principle that a party to a contract cannot be the judge of its own cause when the breach is disputed. Revenue recovery could be invoked only for an ascertained or adjudicated amount, and not for a contested claim of damages where the liability itself had not been independently determined. The proper remedy for the department was to obtain adjudication of its claim in accordance with law.

Conclusion: The demand for disputed contractual damages could not be enforced through revenue recovery and was quashed.

Issue (iii): Whether the royalty demand for granite quarrying could be sustained and whether the petitioner was entitled to seek waiver of the royalty demand.

Analysis: The royalty demand arose from quarrying granite from private property for departmental works. The Court did not finally determine the substantive exemption claim, but held that the petitioner should be permitted to make a fresh representation for waiver in view of the lapse of time. Until the Government decided the representation, recovery was directed to remain in abeyance.

Conclusion: The royalty recovery was kept in abeyance pending consideration of a fresh representation for waiver.

Final Conclusion: The petitioner succeeded in part: the reassessment was annulled for want of fair opportunity, the disputed damages demand was set aside for want of prior adjudication, and the royalty recovery was held in abeyance pending governmental consideration.

Ratio Decidendi: A tax reassessment made without reasonable opportunity is liable to be set aside, and a disputed contractual claim for damages cannot be recovered through revenue recovery unless the liability has first been adjudicated and ascertained by an independent authority.

---