Personal hearing requirement led to setting aside of orders and remand for fresh adjudication after hearing the petitioner

Orders passed without granting the petitioner a personal hearing could not be sustained. The Court noted the admitted absence of an opportunity of hearing before the final orders were made, and accepted the respondents' stand that the matter could be decided afresh after hearing the petitioner. The impugned orders were therefore set aside and the proceedings were remitted to the competent authority for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after affording personal hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned orders were liable to be set aside for having been passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity of personal hearing, and whether the matter should be remitted for fresh consideration.

Analysis: The Court noted the admitted position that no personal hearing had been granted before passing the final orders. In view of the respondents' fair stand that the matter could be decided afresh after hearing the petitioner, the Court found that the impugned orders could not be sustained. The appropriate course was to set aside the final orders and remit the proceedings to the competent authority for fresh adjudication in accordance with law after granting an opportunity of personal hearing.

Conclusion: The impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh decision after affording personal hearing to the petitioner.

---