KANTILAL B. MOHITE Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Rule. By consent, rule made returnable forthwith. At the instance and request of the Counsel both the petitions are taken up for hearing.

(2.) What is challenged in these two petitions under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is the common order dated 12 December 2011 of the Settlement Commission under Section 32F of the Central Excise Act,1944 ( "the Act").

(3.) Since we propose to set aside the impugned order only on the ground of failure to grant a personal hearing with liberty to the Settlement Commission to pass a fresh order after hearing the petitioner, it is not necessary to set out the facts in detail. Suffice to state that the petitioner in Writ Petition No.4970 of 2013 is the applicant before the Settlement Commission to whom a show cause notice has been issued demanding excise duty while the petitioner in Writ Petition No.4971 of 2013 is the coapplicant before Settlement Commission to whom a show cause notice has been issued proposing a penalty.