Natural justice breach in adjudication: reliance on undisclosed submissions and denial of cross-examination required remand.

Adjudication was vitiated where the authority relied on the Investigating Officer's submissions received after the personal hearing without notice to the appellants, depriving them of an opportunity to ? respond, and also refused cross-examination of the co-accused while using his statement to support the charge. Those procedural defects breached the principles of natural justice and rendered the proceedings unsustainable. The matter had to be remanded for fresh adjudication after giving the parties due opportunity to meet the material relied upon.

---

---

Issues: Whether the adjudication order was vitiated for breach of natural justice by considering submissions made behind the appellants' back and by denying cross-examination of the co-accused, and whether the matter should be remanded for fresh adjudication.

Analysis: The adjudicating authority had received and relied upon submissions of the Investigating Officer after the personal hearing had concluded, without notice to the appellants or an opportunity to respond. In addition, the request for cross-examination of the co-accused was declined, yet his statement was used to sustain the charge against the second appellant. These defects went to the fairness of the proceedings and rendered the adjudication unsustainable.

Conclusion: The adjudication order was vitiated for violation of the principles of natural justice, and the matter had to be sent back for reconsideration after giving due opportunity to the parties.

---