Binding remand directions must be followed; failure to inspect with expert assistance led to fresh adjudication.

An adjudication passed in breach of binding remand directions cannot be sustained where the Tribunal had required physical inspection of the furnace with technical assistance and a fresh decision after giving the appellants an effective chance to rebut the technical material. The authority instead relied on technical literature and the existing record without carrying out the directed inspection or providing expert assistance and rebuttal. That departure from the earlier instructions rendered the order unsustainable, so it was set aside and the matter remanded for de novo adjudication in accordance with the Tribunal's directions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the impugned order could stand when it was passed in violation of the Tribunal's earlier direction requiring physical inspection of the furnace with technical assistance and a fresh decision after giving the appellants an opportunity to respond to the technical material.

Analysis: The Tribunal had earlier directed the adjudicating authority to inspect the furnace with the aid of technical experts and thereafter decide the matter in accordance with law after granting the appellants an opportunity of personal hearing. The impugned order was found to have been passed without following that direction, the authority having relied instead on technical literature and undisputed record without the mandated inspection and expert assistance. Such departure from the earlier binding directions rendered the adjudication unsustainable. To preserve the appellants' right to rebut technical findings, the matter required fresh consideration.

Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication in accordance with the Tribunal's earlier directions, after obtaining technical opinion and furnishing it to the appellants for rebuttal.

Final Conclusion: The dispute was sent back for fresh adjudication, and the interim stay request stood disposed of along with the remand.

Ratio Decidendi: An adjudication made in disregard of binding remand directions requiring technical inspection and an effective opportunity to contest the technical material cannot be sustained and must be set aside for fresh decision.

---