Nandini Sales Corporation Vs Union of India (Rajasthan High Court)
The Rajasthan High Court admitted the writ petition challenging the impugned adjudication order and issued directions for further proceedings. Counsel appearing for the respondents accepted notice on an advance copy and was granted four weeks’ time to file a reply, while the petitioner was permitted to file a rejoinder within two weeks thereafter. The matter was directed to be listed after six weeks along with D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 9794/2024. Pending adjudication of the writ petition, the Court took note of the petitioner’s contention that the impugned order suffered from a serious violation of the principles of natural justice. According to the petitioner, adverse findings had been recorded based on statements of numerous witnesses, despite the petitioner not being allowed to cross-examine those witnesses even after repeated requests and despite an earlier order of the Court. Considering these submissions, the Court directed that no coercive recovery action shall be taken pursuant to the impugned order. However, liberty was granted to the respondents to seek vacation of the interim stay order.
FULL TEXT OF THE JUDGMENT/ORDER OF RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Heard.
The petition is admitted for hearing.
Mr. Kinshuk Jain, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents on advance copy takes notice and is granted four weeks time to file reply.
