2010 (2) TMI 705

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... disposed of by Final Order No. 727-728/09-Ex on 8th September, 2009 [2010 (250) E.L.T. 243 (Tribunal)]. The present applications were filed on 20th November, 2009. 2. The grounds disclosed in the applications are as under : "(i)    The counsel had applied for adjournment of the hearing which was not considered and the order was passed without giving any weightage to the circumstances faced by the original respondent in utter defiance of the principles of natural justice. (ii)     The provisions of Rule 40 and 41 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 lays down the inherent powers of the Tribunal for exercising control over departmental authorities in relation to all matters arising out of the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... for the respondents. Ultimately, when the matter was taken up on 13-8-08, the Tribunal proceeded to dispose of the same in the absence of the respondents after going through the records on merits. Accordingly, by the said order the appeals were allowed. Thereafter, the respondents filed an application being ROA application No. 236-237/2008 in the above appeals for restoration thereof by recall of order dated 13-8-08. In fact the order dated 13-8-08 related to the disposal of four appeals. Two other appeals were by two other Directors namely, Jagmohan Goel and Smt. Kamlesh Tayal. Those Directors have not sought for restoration of their appeals. The application filed by these appellants were heard on 2-1-2009 and were allowed and their appea....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t possible to entertain any such application. Matters relate to year of 2004. The Tribunal has already on earlier occasion having disposed of the matters on account of failure on the part of the respondents to render necessary assistance in the matter and thereafter having recalled the said order and given fresh opportunity to the respondents to put forth their case, it was expected from the respondents to ensure the appearance of their representative to argue the matters on their behalf. Infact when the matters were adjourned on the last date of hearing, it was made very clear that under no circumstances matters would be adjourned any further. The request for adjournment, therefore, is rejected." 5. Undoubtedly, the application for....