VISHWANATHA SRIDHAR PRABHU Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The vakalatnama of Insolvency and Bankruptcy Board of India ("IBBI") the 2nd Respondent is filed. There is an Affidavit in Reply. It takes the limited point that there is an appellate remedy that is available to the Petitioner.

(2.) That may be so, but the existence of the appellate remedy is not always, or in every situation, an absolute bar to the exercise of equitable and discretionary writ jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. This is inter alia evident from a recent decision of the Supreme Court in Radhakrishna Industries vs State of Himachal Pradesh & Ors.,Civil Appeal No.8969/2022 decided on 5/1/2023.

(3.) One of the principles that attaches to evaluating any administrative or executive action in judicial review is whether the standard applied is reasonable and proportionate. Other well settled tenets of natural justice are of course that an opportunity of being heard must be given and that a reasoned order must be passed. Equally, no authority can exercise jurisdiction that is not vested in it. A hearing is not to be an empty formality. It must be an effective hearing and must result in a reasoned order that reflects a proper application of mind. This speaks to the decision-making process, not the resultant decision itself. Where these elements are found even prima facie to be lacking, a writ Court is not denuded of its powers, nor can it be told that its extraordinary jurisdiction is completely fettered.