Unavailable relied-upon records justified setting aside the adjudication order when merits could not be fairly examined.

The appeal was allowed and the impugned adjudication order was set aside because the relied upon material and proof of service of notices were not traceable, leaving the matter incapable of effective examination on merits. The appellant had repeatedly sought the documents, but the investigation file was unavailable and the earlier stage hearing had not been properly completed. In these circumstances, continuation of the penalty order would have caused prejudice, and interference was warranted in the interests of justice.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appeal should be allowed and the impugned adjudication order set aside when the relied upon record and proof of service of notices were not traceable and the matter could not be effectively heard on merits.

Analysis: The record showed that the appellant had consistently sought the relied upon documents and proof of service, but the respondent stated that the investigation file was not traceable. The matter had remained pending for a long period, and the adjudication could not be meaningfully tested on merits in the absence of the relevant material. In these circumstances, the continuation of the penalty order would cause prejudice, especially when the appellant had not been heard at the earlier stage and the record necessary for adjudication was unavailable.

Conclusion: The appeal was allowed and the impugned order was set aside.

Final Conclusion: The decision rests on the inability to sustain or examine the adjudication on merits because the supporting record was unavailable, warranting interference in favour of the appellant.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the relied upon material and proof of service are not available and the appeal cannot be effectively adjudicated on merits, the impugned order may be set aside in the interests of justice.

---