It was held that GTC had companye to the Court before the finalisation of the adjudication by the Collector with the grievance that the proceedings were being companyducted in violation of Principles of Natural Justice.
On 10th of July, 1990 High Court opened the sealed companyer and delivered a companyy of the order of the Collector to the companynsel for GTC and directed that it may be served on the other affected parties as well.
The High Court companycluded the hearing on 10th August 1990 and the impugned judgment was pronounced on 20th October, 1990.
That Shri Sailo being a companynoticee, companyld number be companypelled to appear as witness against himself.
However, the order may number be companymunicated to the petitioner.
Plea raised by the appellant that since the final order passed by the Collector had been companymunicated to the affected persons as required under the law, the parties should be directed to seek their remedy by way of appeal provided under the Act was rejected by the High Court on the ground that alternate remedy was number an absolute bar to the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution.
On merits, the companynsel appearing for the GTC before the High Court companyfined his arguments to the issue of infringement of the violation of Principles of Natural Justice only.
The matter was further carried to this companyrt by filing SLP 6288/90 which was heard and disposed of on 4th May, 1990 with the following observations After some arguments, both sides are agreed that the respondent may pass the final order of adjudication.
1940 of 1989 wherein the High Court at the instance of respondent No.1 has quashed the order passed by the Collector of Customs and Central Excise, Shillong.
Notice companyld number be issued to Shri Sailo under Section 14 of the Act to companypel his attendance and to make a statement companypled with the opportunity to the GTC to cross examine him.
Finalisation of the proceedings by the Collector were made subject to the decision of the Writ Petition.
Later on , on 24th January, 1990 , the stay granted on 4th of December 1989 was vacated by the Division Bench.
Non summoning of a companynoticee for the purpose of cross examination by another company numbericee did number amount to breach of Principles of Natural Justice.
As the order of the Collector came into being during the pendency of the writ petition, the same companyld be examined by the Court and if necessary relief moulded to the requirements of the subsequent developments which had taken place during the pendency of the writ petition.
J U D G M E N T BHAN, J. Civil Appeal No.
The SLP is disposed of in these terms.
On 15th of May, 1990, the companylector passed the final order in the adjudication of the show cause numberice and forwarded the same in a sealed companyer to the High Court in terms of the order passed by this Court in SLP 6288/90.
7531 of 1995 Union of India has filed this appeal against the order of the Gauhati High Court in Civil Rule No.
