9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (2) TMI 657X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he instant writ petition is that the petitioner has not been granted eligibility certificate under section 4A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act on the ground that one Member of Secretary Level Committee did not agree with the majority view. Brief facts of the case are that the petitioner has established a new unit for manufacture of vanaspati in accordance with the scheme announced by the State Government for promoting the industrial development in the State of Uttar Pradesh and for increasing the production of the goods under section 4A of the U.P. Trade Tax Act. Pursuant to the notification dated December 26, 1985, the General Manager, District Industries Centre, Ghaziabad, namely, the Industries Department, has forwarded the recommendation of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder on March 31, 1992: "In our order dated December 19, 1991 we had indicated that the question of further interim relief shall be considered after the expiry of the above period which we had allowed to the standing counsel to file a counter-affidavit. Counter-affidavit has not been filed. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as also the learned standing counsel. Since the fact that the matter has been disposed of by the State Level Committee and the majority opinion is in favour of the petitioner, we direct that the opposite-parties shall issue provisional eligibility certificate to the petitioner within a week from today subject to the final decision of the writ petition." Thereafter, the aforesaid order was modified o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner moved an amendment application, which was allowed by this court. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that before passing the impugned order dated April 22, 1992, an opportunity of hearing was not afforded to the petitioner. While elaborating his submissions, he contended that after affording opportunity of hearing to the petitioner on April 11, 1991, the State Level Committee passed an order. Further, he submits that in view of the provisions of notification dated December 26, 1985, the Secretary Level Committee was constituted as statutory committee and was acting for the benefit of grant of eligibility certificate as quasi-judicial authority and in absence of power of review, which has not been conferred to the Secretary ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hnicality, grammatical pedantry or logical prevarication. It supplies the omissions of a formulated law. As Lord Buckmaster said, no form or procedure should ever be permitted to exclude the presentation of a litigant's defence. The adherence to principles of natural justice as recognized by all civilized States is of supreme importance when a quasi-judicial body embarks on determining disputes between the parties, or any administrative action involving civil consequences is in issue. These principles are well-settled. The first and foremost principle is what is commonly known as audi alteram partem rule. It says that no one should be condemned unheard. Notice is the first limb of this principle. It must be precise and unambiguous. It shou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e intended to prevent such authority from doing injustice. Inquiries which were considered administrative at one time are now being considered as quasi-judicial in character. Arriving at a just decision is the aim of both quasi-judicial enquiries as well as administrative enquiries. An unjust decision in an administrative enquiry may have more far-reaching effect than decision in a quasi-judicial enquiry. Concept of natural justice has undergone a great deal of change in recent years. Rules of natural justice are not rules embodied always expressly in a statute or in rules framed thereunder. They may be implied from the nature of the duty to be performed under a statute. What particular rule of natural justice should be implied and what it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by law must be just, fair and reasonable, and not arbitrary, fanciful or oppressive." In National Building Construction Corporation v. S. Raghunathan [1998] 7 SCC 66, the apex court in unequivocal words held that a person is entitled to judicial review, if he is able to show that the decision of the public authority affected him of some benefit or advantage which in the past he had been permitted to enjoy and which he legitimately expected to be permitted to continue to enjoy either until he is informed the reasons for withdrawal and the opportunity to comment on such reasons. In view of above legal proposition, as the petitioner has not been afforded opportunity of hearing before passing the impugned order dated April 22, 1992, it is lia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
