Natural justice requires appellate defects to be specified and an opportunity to rectify before an appeal is rejected.

An appellate authority cannot return an appeal as not entertainable on a bare statement that the filing is not in order; if defects are relied on, they must be identified and the appellant must be given a reasonable opportunity to rectify them. The communication here failed to specify any defect and refused entertainment outright, which was inconsistent with fairness and natural justice. On that basis, the return of the appeal was held improper and illegal, and the point was decided in favour of the appellants.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellate authority was justified in returning the appeal as not entertainable without specifying the defects and affording an opportunity to rectify them.

Analysis: The communication merely stated that the appeal petition was not in order and was not entertainable, without identifying the alleged defects. Even on the assumption that defects existed, fairness required the appellate authority to point them out and permit rectification within a reasonable time rather than refuse to entertain the appeal outright. Such a course is consistent with the requirements of natural justice.

Conclusion: The return of the appeal as not entertainable was improper and illegal, and the point was decided in favour of the appellants.

---