Natural justice and reasoned orders required for expropriatory cess assessments; unreasoned orders without hearing were quashed.

Assessment orders under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act were unsustainable because they were made without disclosing any basis for the cess determination, without showing that a hearing had been afforded, and without reasons. The HC held that even where the statute does not expressly require a pre-assessment hearing, an expropriatory fiscal order must comply with natural justice and be reasoned. The appellate order also failed to address the objection on absence of hearing and reasons. On that basis, the assessment and appellate orders were quashed for breach of natural justice and want of reasons.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessment orders and the appellate order under the Water (Prevention and Control of Pollution) Cess Act, 1977 were vitiated for violation of the principles of natural justice and for being unreasoned.

Analysis: The assessment orders did not disclose any basis for the determination of cess and did not indicate that any opportunity of hearing had been afforded. Though the Act did not expressly provide for a pre-assessment hearing, an expropriatory fiscal order must comply with the principles of natural justice. The appellate order also did not deal with the specific objection regarding absence of hearing and reasons. The Court rejected the contention that the statutory appeal was merely a post-decisional hearing and held that the impugned orders could not be sustained in the absence of procedural fairness and reasons.

Conclusion: The assessment orders and the appellate order were quashed for breach of natural justice and for want of reasons, and the petitioner succeeded.

Ratio Decidendi: Even where the statute does not expressly require a prior hearing, an expropriatory assessment order must be preceded by observance of natural justice and supported by reasons; failure to do so renders the order unsustainable.

---