Natural justice and speaking order challenge fails where notice was served, hearings were offered, and the appellate order affirmed a reasoned decision.

Repeated service of the show-cause notice and multiple opportunities of personal hearing defeated the allegation of breach of natural justice, as the appellant was aware of the proceedings, corresponded through counsel, and did not avail the hearings. The original adjudication was therefore not vitiated. The appellate order was also upheld because it affirmed a reasoned original decision on the existing record, and it was not invalid merely because it did not restate those reasons in full. The court found no basis for remand and upheld the impugned orders.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the order of the Additional Director General of Foreign Trade was vitiated for breach of natural justice on account of inadequate opportunity of hearing. (ii) Whether the appellate order was bad in law for want of reasons as a non-speaking order.

Issue (i): Whether the order of the Additional Director General of Foreign Trade was vitiated for breach of natural justice on account of inadequate opportunity of hearing.

Analysis: The record showed repeated service of the show-cause notice and several opportunities for personal hearing. The appellant was aware of the proceedings, had corresponded through counsel, and did not avail the opportunities granted. The factual basis for alleging denial of hearing was therefore not made out.

Conclusion: The plea of violation of natural justice was rejected and this issue was decided against the appellant.

Issue (ii): Whether the appellate order was bad in law for want of reasons as a non-speaking order.

Analysis: The appellate authority was considering an appeal on the existing record and was affirming the original order. Since the original adjudication contained reasons and the appellant's new factual explanations were not part of the original record, the absence of repetition of reasons in the appellate order did not vitiate it. A remand was found unnecessary.

Conclusion: The challenge to the appellate order as non-speaking failed and this issue was decided against the appellant.

Final Conclusion: The court found no merit in the appeal and upheld the impugned orders.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a party is repeatedly given notice and opportunities to participate but does not avail them, the adjudication is not vitiated for breach of natural justice; and an appellate order affirming a reasoned original decision is not invalid merely because it does not restate the reasons in full.

---