Natural justice requires a fresh, uninfluenced opinion when relied-upon documents were withheld from adjudication.

Withholding relied-upon documents breached natural justice because the appellant was entitled to receive them before adjudication. After a fresh opportunity to explain was directed, any opinion formed on an incomplete record could not continue to govern the matter. The adjudicating authority had to reconsider the case on the basis of the full set of documents and the appellant's fresh explanation, without being influenced by the earlier view. The earlier opinion was therefore treated as non-est, and a fresh opinion had to be formed independently.

---

---

Issues: Whether, after withholding four relied-upon documents and directing a fresh explanation, the earlier opinion already formed by the adjudicating authority could survive or whether a fresh opinion had to be formed uninfluenced by the earlier one.

Analysis: The withheld documents were material to the adjudication and the appellant was entitled to have them supplied before the matter was decided. Once the court below found a violation of natural justice and directed a fresh opportunity to explain after supply of the documents, any prior opinion formed on an incomplete record could not govern the rehearing. The subsequent determination had to be based on the appellant's fresh explanation and the full set of documents, without being influenced by the earlier view.

Conclusion: The earlier opinion was held to be non-est, and the adjudicating authority was required to form a fresh opinion uninfluenced by the earlier opinion.

---