Meaningful opportunity of hearing upheld as adjudication was set aside and remanded for fresh decision.

Where a party was effectively deprived of a meaningful opportunity to present its case because of illness and hospitalization, the Court interfered with the adjudication to protect fairness in representation. It set aside the impugned order in original and restored the matter for fresh adjudication, directing the authority to grant one further opportunity of hearing to the petitioner before deciding again.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned order in original was liable to be set aside and the matter restored for one further opportunity of hearing to the petitioner in view of the asserted inability to properly represent the case.

Analysis: The sequence of events relating to the petitioner's illness and hospitalization, together with the issuance of the show cause notice and the adjudication that followed, persuaded the Court to interfere. The relief was granted to ensure one last opportunity of representation before the authority.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was sent back for fresh adjudication after granting one further opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, with the stated condition for communication of the order to the authority.

Final Conclusion: The writ petition succeeded to the extent of setting aside the adjudication and securing a fresh hearing before the authority.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the Court finds that a party was effectively deprived of a meaningful opportunity to present the case, it may set aside the adjudication and restore the matter for fresh decision after granting a further hearing.

---