1986 (5) TMI 171

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....as not sustainable. In this connection,, reliance was placed on an order of the Collector (Appeals) passed in 'July, 1985 whereby an earlier decision of adjudication made by the respondent was set aside and he was required to decide the matter de novo in the light of the observations made in the appellate order. On its basis it was urged that without making an adjudication in pursuance of the said order of remand it was not open to the respondent to seize the goods of the petitioner. The writ petition was presented on 21st February 1986. On that date counsel for the respondent appeared and undertook to file a counter affidavit. Further adjudication proceedings were ordered to be stayed. Subsequently, counter and rejoinder affidavits have be....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....has been made out for allowing the application for amendment of the writ petition and for adding the prayer that the order dated 19th February, 1986 may be quashed. We accordingly allow that application. The necessary amendment may be incorporated in the writ petition. 2. It has been urged by counsel for the petitioner relying on Annexures -15 and 16 of the writ petition which have been filed along with the aforesaid amendment application, that before passing the order dated 19th February, 1986 the petitioner was not granted hearing as was contemplated by the aforesaid annexures Annexure-15 to the writ petition is a notice of the respondent addressed to the petitioner. It is dated 20th December, 1985 and it indicates that 7th Januar....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s tantamount to granting personal hearing on a date fixed in this behalf as was contemplated by the respondent and as is apparent by the notice, a copy whereof has been filed as Annexure-15 to the writ petition whereby 7th January, 1986 was fixed as the date for personal hearing. When the case could not be taken up on 7th of January, 1986 and a prayer had specifically been made on behalf of the petitioner in the application made on that date, a further date for personal hearing should have been fixed so that the petitioner could appear on that date in order to substantiate his case. This not having been done the order dated 19th February, 1986 cannot be sustained and deserves to be quashed. 3. As regards the main prayer contained in....