BASHIR Vs. FINANCIAL COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ON October 9, 1998 the Financial Commissioner Appeals, accepted the revision petition filed by Geja Singh and two others. Resultantly he set aside the order dated February 4, 1998 passed in favour of the present petitioners. Aggrieved by the order of the Financial Commissioner, the petitioners have approached this Court. They complain that despite being parties in the revision petition, the Financial Commissioner gave no notice to them before passing the impugned order. It has been alleged that the case was posted before the learned Financial Commissioner Revenue on September 8, 1998. On that date, it was transferred to the 'Financial Commissioner Appeals-I'. The counsel for the petitioners and State counsel were present on that date. On September 25, 1998 the Financial Commissioner Appeals heard the case and reserved the orders. He did not issue any notice to respondents No. 2 to 4 at any stage. Thus, the petitioners allege that there was violation of the elementary rules of natural justice. They pray that the order of the Financial Commissioner be set aside.

(2.) NOTICE of motion was issued. A written statement has been filed on behalf of respondents No. 1 to 5. In paragraph 8 of the written statement it has been averred that the case was transferred to the Financial Commissioner Appeals for preliminary hearing. In para 9 it has been stated that the petitioners were a party in the revision petition. However, the specific averments in the petition that the Financial Commissioner had proceeded to accept the revision "without issuing any notice to the petitioners" as made in para 9 of the writ petition, has not been controverted.

(3.) ADMITTEDLY , the Commissioner had accepted the claim of the present petitioners. Respondents No. 6 to 8 were aggrieved by the order. They had filed a revision petition. All persons who were parties to the case had a right to be heard before the competent authority arrived at a final decision. In the present case no notice appears to have been issued to the present petitioners. They were, thus, denied the right to appear and argue.