Petitioners allowed to present evidence with scrutiny and cross-examination; Respondents can rely on own findings.

The writ petitions were disposed of with observations allowing the petitioners to produce materials and expert evidence, subject to scrutiny and cross-examination. Respondents were directed to allow cross-examination if relying on the National Metallurgical Laboratory report; otherwise, they were free to proceed based on their own findings and admissions. Expert evidence by petitioners was subject to Department scrutiny and cross-examination, with no costs incurred.

---

---

Issues involved: Certiorarified Mandamus sought to quash order denying cross-examination of National Metallurgical Laboratory Scientists.

Facts: The petitioners, companies under the Indian Companies Act, faced an investigation alleging imported goods were not melting scrap. Statements were recorded, and differential duty was deposited. Request for expert opinion from National Metallurgical Laboratory resulted in a report stating goods were non-alloy steel sheets/plates. Further clarification confirmed goods were second-grade rolled plates and sheets. Petitioners requested cross-examination of Scientists.

Contentions: Petitioners argued denial of cross-examination violated natural justice. Respondents claimed reports confirmed petitioners' admissions, so no need for cross-examination. Court noted respondents could rely on expert opinion but if so, petitioners entitled to cross-examine. Respondents directed to issue fresh notice of enquiry and provide opportunity for cross-examination if relying on NML report.

Decision: Writ petitions disposed of with observations allowing petitioners to produce materials and expert evidence, subject to scrutiny and cross-examination. Respondents directed to allow cross-examination if relying on NML report, otherwise free to proceed based on own findings and admissions. Expert evidence by petitioners subject to Department scrutiny and cross-examination. No costs incurred.

---