Natural justice in excise adjudication requires witness examination; denial can vitiate confiscation and penalty orders despite alternative remedy.

A quasi-judicial excise adjudication must comply with natural justice, including a fair opportunity to examine the Chemical Examiner and other material witnesses. Refusal to permit such examination was treated as a serious procedural infirmity that vitiated the confiscation and penalty proceedings, and the impugned orders were set aside. The existence of an alternative statutory remedy did not bar writ relief where the action suffered from a defect affecting the legality of the orders. The alternative-remedy objection therefore failed, and the confiscation, penalty, and related demand orders could not be sustained.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether denial of an opportunity to examine the Chemical Examiner and departmental witnesses vitiated the confiscation and penalty proceedings for breach of natural justice; (ii) Whether the writ petition was liable to be rejected for failure to pursue the alternative statutory remedy.

Issue (i): Whether denial of an opportunity to examine the Chemical Examiner and departmental witnesses vitiated the confiscation and penalty proceedings for breach of natural justice.

Analysis: The proceedings were quasi-judicial in character, and the petitioner was entitled to test the basis of the charge by examining relevant witnesses. The suggested course of leaving clarification to the adjudicating authority itself was inconsistent with fair procedure. Refusal to permit the examination of witnesses, on the facts of the case, amounted to a denial of the demands of natural justice.

Conclusion: The denial of witness examination vitiated the impugned orders and was against the petitioner.

Issue (ii): Whether the writ petition was liable to be rejected for failure to pursue the alternative statutory remedy.

Analysis: The objection was not accepted in light of the principle that the existence of an alternative remedy did not bar relief where the impugned action suffered from a serious procedural infirmity affecting the legality of the orders.

Conclusion: The alternative-remedy objection failed and was against the respondent.

Final Conclusion: The impugned orders could not be sustained, and the writ petition succeeded with the confiscation, penalty, and related demand orders set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: A quasi-judicial excise adjudication must comply with natural justice, including a fair opportunity to examine material witnesses, and a procedural defect of that kind can justify writ relief notwithstanding an alternative statutory remedy.

---