Fresh adjudication on mixed fact and law leads to remand and quashing of adverse recovery action.

Where a dispute involves mixed questions of fact and law better examined by the competent authority, the writ court may remit the matter for fresh adjudication after hearing the parties. Applying that approach, the High Court sent the matter back for reconsideration on factual and legal aspects, and the impugned order and recovery notice were set aside in view of the remand.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the petition was to be disposed of by directing the competent authority to reconsider the matter afresh on factual and legal aspects. (ii) Whether the impugned order and recovery notice were liable to be quashed and set aside.

Issue (i): The dispute involved questions of fact and law which the competent authority was better suited to examine. The parties accepted that a fresh decision by the authority would be appropriate.

Conclusion: The matter was remitted to respondent No. 4 for reconsideration afresh on factual and legal aspects.

Issue (ii): In view of the course adopted, the challenged order and recovery notice could not stand and were set aside.

Conclusion: The impugned order dated 31.12.2023 and the recovery notice dated 20.02.2024 were quashed and set aside.

Final Conclusion: The petition was disposed of by remanding the matter to the competent authority for a fresh decision after hearing the parties, with the earlier adverse action set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the controversy turns on mixed factual and legal issues better examined by the competent authority, the writ court may remit the matter for fresh adjudication and set aside the impugned action.

---