Case Law Details
Shree Balaji Industries Laxminarayanpuri Vs Additional Commissioner (Rajasthan High Court)
The Rajasthan High Court considered the writ petition challenging an impugned adjudication order and issued notice to the respondents while granting interim protection to the petitioner. Counsel appearing on behalf of Respondent No. 5 sought time to file a reply, and the Court granted three weeks for the same. Since there was no representation on behalf of Respondents No. 1 to 4 despite service of an advance copy through the office of the Additional Solicitor General, the Court directed issuance of notices to them upon payment of process fee within one week, returnable within four weeks. The matter was directed to be listed after five weeks along with D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3006/2025. While considering the petitioner’s submissions, the Court took note of the allegation that the impugned adjudication order heavily relied upon the statements of Shri Shubham Gupta and Shri Ramchandra Gupta without providing the petitioner an opportunity to cross-examine them, despite repeated requests. Observing the alleged violation of principles of natural justice, the Court directed that no coercive recovery action shall be taken pursuant to the impugned order until the next date of hearing. 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.
Mr. Kartikey Sharma, associate of Mr. Sandeep Taneja, learned Additional Advocate General enters appearance on behalf of Respondent No. 5.
There is no representation on behalf of Respondents No. 1 to 4 though advance copy has been supplied in the office of Additional Solicitor General.
Learned counsel for Respondent No. 5 is granted three weeks’ time to file reply.
Issue notice to Respondents No. 1 to 4 on payment of P.F. within one week, returnable within four weeks.
In the meanwhile, taking into consideration submission made by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned adjudication order suffers from serious violation of principles of natural justice inasmuch as statements of Shri Shubham Gupta and Shri Ramchandra Gupta have been heavily relied upon against the petitioner without affording any opportunity of cross-examination despite repeated prayers made in this regard, it is directed that till the next date of hearing, no coercive action for recovery shall be taken on the basis of impugned order.
List this matter after five weeks along with D.B. Civil Writ Petition No. 3006/2025.
The respondents shall be at liberty to apply for vacating stay order.
Author Bio
