Reasonable opportunity in blacklisting matters is satisfied when notice is issued, reply considered, and adverse decision follows.

A blacklisting order was challenged as being vitiated by denial of reasonable opportunity and procedural impropriety under paragraph 7(I)(k) of the Foreign Trade Development (Regulation) Rules, 1993. The record showed that a show cause notice was issued, a reply was filed, and the authority considered that reply before passing the adverse order. On those facts, the decision-making process was not faulted for breach of procedural fairness, and the challenge based on absence of reasonable opportunity failed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned blacklisting order was liable to be set aside for want of reasonable opportunity and procedural impropriety under paragraph 7(I)(k) of the Foreign Trade Development (Regulation) Rules, 1993.

Analysis: The record showed that a show cause notice had been issued, the petitioner had submitted a reply, and the authority had considered that reply before passing the blacklisting order. On those facts, the decision-making process could not be faulted for breach of procedural fairness. The challenge based on absence of reasonable opportunity was therefore not made out.

Conclusion: The challenge to the blacklisting order failed, and the writ petition was liable to be dismissed.

Final Conclusion: The impugned administrative action was upheld as having been taken after affording an opportunity of hearing, with no procedural infirmity established.

Ratio Decidendi: Where a show cause notice is issued, a reply is received, and the authority considers that reply before taking an adverse decision, the order cannot be invalidated on the ground of denial of reasonable opportunity or procedural impropriety.

---