Natural justice challenge fails where the noticee adopts a co-noticee's reply and shows no prejudice.

A challenge to a show-cause notice on the ground of non-supply of relied-upon documents failed because the appellant did not ask for the documents during the response period, sought extension of time, and then expressly adopted the co-noticee's reply as his own. The documents had already been supplied to the co-noticee, and the appellant also did not avail a personal hearing. In the absence of demonstrated prejudice, the complaint of denial of opportunity and natural justice was held unsustainable, and the disciplinary action was sustained.

---

---

Issues: Whether the appellant could succeed on the plea that the show-cause notice was invalid for want of the relied-upon documents, amounting to violation of natural justice.

Analysis: The only substantive challenge was the alleged non-supply of documents along with the show-cause notice. The appellant, however, did not seek the documents during the response period, sought extension of time, and then expressly adopted the reply filed by the audit firm, stating that the firm's reply would be treated as his reply as well. The documents had already been served on the firm, and the appellant also did not avail a personal hearing. In these circumstances, the complaint of denial of opportunity was held to be unsustainable, as no prejudice was shown and the appellant could not take a different stand after having relied on the co-noticee's response.

Conclusion: The plea of violation of natural justice was rejected and the appeal failed.

Final Conclusion: The impugned order was sustained, and the challenge to the disciplinary action did not succeed.

Ratio Decidendi: A party who adopts the co-noticee's reply and does not seek the relied-upon material or a hearing during the proceedings cannot later complain of denial of natural justice in the absence of demonstrated prejudice.

---