Adie Broswon Distrillers and Bottlers Pvt. Ltd. vs State of Haryana

Ajay Kumar Mittal, J.—The petitioner has approached this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India for quashing the impugned order dated 16.07.2014 (Annexure P-5) passed by the Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Haryana, Panchkula exercising the powers of Financial Commissioner and communicated by Joint Excise & Taxation Commissioner (Excise) on behalf of the Commissioner.

In view of the order we propose to pass, it is not essential to delve into factual matrix in detail. The primary grievance raised herein is that the impugned order dated 16.07.2014 (Annexure P-5) has been passed without providing any opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and respondent No. 2 has no power to review such order without issuing notice to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the impugned order dated 16.07.2014 (Annexure P-5) has been passed without providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and at the behest of respondent No. 3. The reference has been made to Sub-Section (9) of Section 15 of the Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (in short ''the Act'') as applicable to the State of Haryana.

It could not be controverted by the learned counsel for the respondents that the impugned order dated 16.07.2014 (Annexure P-5) has been passed without providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The Hon''ble Apex Court in Canara Bank Vs. V.K. Awasthy, while dealing with the doctrine of principles of natural justice had noticed as under:-

"8. Natural justice is another name for commonsense justice. Rules of natural justice are not codified canons. But they are principles ingrained into the conscience of man. Natural justice is the administration of justice in a commonsense liberal way. Justice is based substantially on natural ideals and human values. The administration of justice is to be freed from the narrow and restricted considerations which are usually associated with a formulated law involving linguistic technicalities and grammatical niceties. It is the substance of justice which has to determine its form.

The expressions "natural justice" and "legal justice" do not present a water-tight classification. It is the substance of justice which is to be secured by both, and whenever legal justice fails to achieve this solemn purpose, natural justice is called in aid of legal justice. Natural justice relieves legal justice from unnecessary technicality, 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 litigants'' 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 should appraise the party determinatively the case he has to meet. Time given for the purpose should be adequate so as to enable him to make his representation. In the absence of a notice of the kind and such reasonable opportunity, the order passed becomes wholly vitiated. Thus, it is but essential that a party should be put on notice of the case before any adverse order is passed against him. This is one of the most important principles of natural justice. It is after all an approved rule of fair play. The concept has gained significance and shades with time. When the historic document was made at Runnymede in 1215, the first statutory recognition of this principle found its way into the "Magna Carta". The classic exposition of Sir Edward Coke of natural justice requires to evocate interrogate and adjudicate". In the celebrated case of Cooper v. Wandsworth Board of Works, (1963) 143 ER 414, the principle was thus stated:

"Even God did not pass a sentence upon Adam, before he was called upon to make his defence. "Adam" says God, "where art thou has thou not eaten of the tree whereof I commanded thee that though should not eat".

Since then the principle has been chiseled, honed and refined, enriching its content. Judicial treatment has added light and luminosity to the concept, like polishing of a diamond.

Principles of natural justice are those rules which have been laid down by the Courts as being the minimum protection of the rights of the individual against the arbitrary procedure that may be adopted by a judicial, quasi-judicial and administrative authority while making an order affecting those rights. These rules are intended to prevent such authority from doing injustice.

Further Sub-Section (9) of Section 15 of the Act provides that no order shall be made under this section which adversely affects the rights of any person unless such person has been given a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

In view of the above, the impugned order dated 16.07.2014 (Annexure P-5) is set aside and the matter is remanded back to the Excise & Taxation Commissioner, Haryana, Panchkula exercising the powers of Financial Commissioner to decide the matter afresh after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to respondent No. 3 by passing a speaking order, in accordance with law. Needful be done within a period of one week from the date of receipt of certified copy of the order.