https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272997 In a domestic enquiry, refusal to allow an employee to engage a legal practitioner, while the employer is represented by legally trained presenting officers, creates an uneven contest and denies a reasonable opportunity of defence, contrary to natural justice. The refusal is treated as unfair where serious civil consequences may follow, and the enquiry is vitiated. Where Regulation 12(8) of the Bombay Port Trust Employees Regulations, 1976 came into force during the enquiry, fairness required reconsideration of the earlier refusal; continued denial of legal assistance in those circumstances further offended fair procedure and strengthened the employee's entitlement to representation. en-us Wed, 17 Nov 1982 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 30 May 2018 10:45:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272997 In a domestic enquiry, refusal to allow an employee to engage a legal practitioner, while the employer is represented by legally trained presenting officers, creates an uneven contest and denies a reasonable opportunity of defence, contrary to natural justice. The refusal is treated as unfair where serious civil consequences may follow, and the enquiry is vitiated. Where Regulation 12(8) of the Bombay Port Trust Employees Regulations, 1976 came into force during the enquiry, fairness required reconsideration of the earlier refusal; continued denial of legal assistance in those circumstances further offended fair procedure and strengthened the employee's entitlement to representation. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 17 Nov 1982 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272997